Immigrant Arrives at Texas Port of Entry Posing with Underage ‘Daughter’ he had been Raping

I used to the buy the "prohibition exacerbates the problem" nonsense when I was in my youth; when I was still in college. Time tutored me harshly. Drugs like cocaine, meth, and opiates can't be tolerated. They will ravage your poor, and swell your poor. They are not similar to "soft" drugs like marijuana and alcohol (neither of which that has a system of production that can be controlled, at all, ever). Drug liberalization has severe limits on its effectiveness.

So did I. But after living in some liberal cities where hard drugs are de facto legal, I changed my mind.
 
Last edited:
Again false dichotomy, these drugs became a problem because your for-profit healthcare industry turned doctors into drug-dealers.

Too many 80s sunday morning cartoon PSAs about not trusting drugdealers forgot to mention that drugdealers also come in white coats.

Market can be regulated, spare me your false dichotomies and nirvana fallacies. People trust doctors to use their knowledge to heal them, not to sell them drugs under false pretenses to get kickbacks.


"Will" as in its not happening right now?

X + 1 > X

On top of the drug epidemic the poor also have to deal with the consequences of prohibition. Which do far more to ravage the poor than anything else.


As opposed to prohibition which is super effective? why are puritans so afraid to try ANYTHING else but prohibition?



Trump is an anti-drug fringe.






Of course we are losing the war on drugs, its an unwinnable war.

Its a war on capitalism itself.



Michoacan and Guerrero are poppy growing zones, they also have the main industrial ports when it comes to pacific trade. Most ephedrine in Mexico (used to make meth) comes from Asia.



Yup, crossing a river is the same as crossing the street.



I do support more drastric measures to combat gun violence, but gun violence itself isnt the crux of the issue, its the money associated with the drug trade.

If you want to stop drug cartels its best to go after the money, but then again thats what got Camarena and Buendia killed.



Crime and violence are the byproduct of prohibition, you dont see breweries or tobacco companies murdering each other for the market.



Thanks for conceding the point that prohibition doesnt works.

EDIT

Funny how you claim that the end of prohibition is a "hippie liberal thing". The cognifitve dissonance is strong in you.

The "war on drugs is a war on capitalism itself". Slaves are profitable, too. You could probably turn a profit on child prostitutes while you're at it in your quest for capitalistic purity, Mr. Socialista.

Our doctors may have prescribed most of this medication, but the majority of drug addicts who have resulted from the crisis are not those to whom the drugs were prescribed. Accessibility to the drug, and not incidental or forced addiction, has been the driving force behind the spread of the opioid epidemic.

I just explained the ephedrine landscape, and how it has changed over the past several decades, including mention of China and India's entrance to the game. It matters little to me that now the cartels import unregulated precursors that required modification to the cooking process, because such tactics are available to the grassroots American home lab market, and they are not the problem, nor are they the ones who outsourced construction of new superlabs to Guatemala which is another part of this drug empire's land bridge. Nevertheless, I'm not sure who planted the lie in your head that meth stopped being produced in superlabs in Mexico itself following that legislation. Maybe you should stop reading that corrupt Mexican press if you can't sort out the facts.

Immediately after that you cite a YouTube video showing Spicer playing up the anti-marijuana rhetoric for the cameras as evidence that Trump is "anti-drug fringe." How so? He hasn't harassed legal grows. The DEA hasn't habitually violated state, county, or municipal grows-- not even ones operating in the "grey" areas-- under subjugation of federal law. Their focus of actual DEA drug policing within states where it is legal for recreation or medicine-only has been on non-compliant grows in those states, and that makes perfect sense (these are the grows that divert water, destroying ecosystems, and polluting the freshwater supply). Trump has threatened to use that to harass sanctuary cities who do not comply with federal law, but that's leverage in tit-for-tat politics (after all, if you don't respect federal law, don't expect the feds to respect you). The hostility to marijuana reform comes chiefly from the congressional GOP. If we want to look to the most recent rhetoric from his administration you need look no further than Trump himself:
Trump says he is likely to support ending blanket federal ban on marijuana
LA Times said:
But prosecutors did back off. During this administration, there have apparently been no federal raids or seizures of pot companies for sales that are legal under state law.

“Remarkably little, if anything, has changed,” said John Vardaman, a former Justice Department attorney who helped draft the Obama-era rules, known as the Cole memo, after former Deputy Atty. Gen. James M. Cole, who issued it. “Almost every U.S. attorney in states where marijuana is legal has decided to apply the same principles as the Cole memo,” said Vardaman, now an executive at Hypur, which sells banking compliance software to marijuana companies.
Again, if you possessed any substantive or comprehensive knowledge of these problems your suggestions or beliefs for how to fix them might be worth entertaining, but you take for granted such basic assumptions that are objectively wrong it becomes impossible to resist manipulating you into demonstrating your ignorance as I have done, here, again.
 
All children should be removed from whatever adult they are with until it can be proven that they are related at the very least.
wait how about we build a wall who prevent them all to enter illegaly? oh wait
 
The "war on drugs is a war on capitalism itself". Slaves are profitable, too. You could probably turn a profit on child prostitutes while you're at it in your quest for capitalistic purity, Mr. Socialista.

Yup, thats why human trafficking is so hard to fight against and another instance where the US fails miserably by criminalizing the victims.

When you have a crime with an actual victim, usually there is a societal interest beyond law enforcement to see it gone, in countries where prostitutes arent criminalized they can actually look for help and escape.

Our doctors may have prescribed most of this medication, but the majority of drug addicts who have resulted from the crisis are not those to whom the drugs were prescribed. Accessibility to the drug, and not incidental or forced addiction, has been the driving force behind the spread of the opioid epidemic.

Around 80% of heroine addicts in America started with prescription drugs.

I just explained the ephedrine landscape, and how it has changed over the past several decades, including mention of China and India's entrance to the game. It matters little to me that now the cartels import unregulated precursors that required modification to the cooking process, because such tactics are available to the grassroots American home lab market, and they are not the problem, nor are they the ones who outsourced construction of new superlabs to Guatemala which is another part of this drug empire's land bridge. Nevertheless, I'm not sure who planted the lie in your head that meth stopped being produced in superlabs in Mexico itself following that legislation. Maybe you should stop reading that corrupt Mexican press if you can't sort out the facts.

Can you focus a little when you are replying to?

You were arguing that there is this violence epidemic in Mexico unrelated to the drug trade and you put an homicide map in Mexico showing the violence concentration in a few southern states.

I merely explained the importance of said states in the drug trade.

Immediately after that you cite a YouTube video showing Spicer playing up the anti-marijuana rhetoric for the cameras as evidence that Trump is "anti-drug fringe." How so? He hasn't harassed legal grows. The DEA hasn't habitually violated state, county, or municipal grows-- not even ones operating in the "grey" areas-- under subjugation of federal law. Their focus of actual DEA drug policing within states where it is legal for recreation or medicine-only has been on non-compliant grows in those states, and that makes perfect sense (these are the grows that divert water, destroying ecosystems, and polluting the freshwater supply). Trump has threatened to use that to harass sanctuary cities who do not comply with federal law, but that's leverage in tit-for-tat politics (after all, if you don't respect federal law, don't expect the feds to respect you). The hostility to marijuana reform comes chiefly from the congressional GOP. If we want to look to the most recent rhetoric from his administration you need look no further than Trump himself:

http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-pol-pot-sessions-20180104-story.html#
 
Yup, thats why human trafficking is so hard to fight against and another instance where the US fails miserably by criminalizing the victims.

When you have a crime with an actual victim, usually there is a societal interest beyond law enforcement to see it gone, in countries where prostitutes arent criminalized they can actually look for help and escape.
Your irrational hatred is nearly boundless. The US is nowhere near to the worst offenders in terms of human trafficking. You know that, right? Want to know 8 of the worst nations as cited by the U.N. Global Report on Trafficking in Persons & the US Trafficking in Person's Report?
  • Russia
  • China
  • Iran
  • Belize
  • Venezuela
  • Belarus
  • North Korea
  • Syria
Those are Tier 3 countries. Cuba, Bolivia, Nicaragua, and Guatemala are on the Tier 2 "Watch List". Mexico and nearly the entire remainder of Latin America rank in Tier 2. Chile, Colombia, and Guyana are the only South American countries that make Tier 1. Not a single Central American country makes Tier 1.

The worst two regions, by far, according to the U.N. are (1) Eastern Europe and Central Asia, and (2) North Africa and the Middle East.

Meanwhile, the US is a "Tier 1" country ranking with the highest level of integrity and response to these underground markets. Goddamn, Mr. Socialista, it's almost like you should reconsider your entire world view, and wake the hell up to who the real baddies are. Maybe start by reading a bit more prior to forming your anti-American opinions, and then consider spending a bit more time in the mirror.
Around 80% of heroine addicts in America started with prescription drugs.
<LikeReally5><JagsKiddingMe><SelenaWow>


Yet not the principal of those whom were prescribed those drugs themselves. Yes, I know the exact source you just Googled. Unfortunately for you, I possess acquired knowledge on this topic, and possessing this knowledge, understood its character prior to this debate. You see, if you review that study, it was reporting on prior NMPR use: nonmedical pain reliever abuse.

The legal supply is diverted and distributed into the black market due to its greater availability and over-prescription. This is precisely my point. You have just reinforced my case against the liberalization of harder drugs for me. After all, heroin is legal as a painkiller itself in Britain, and like us they have not succumbed to a snowball effect of patients-turned-junkies, but unlike us they have kept those drugs from ballooning their opiate black market. Why do you think that is? Do you think it might have something to do with more tightly controlling the dissemination of those drugs? I've never been so envious of an island; not being attached to Latin America certainly has its perks.

Please, educate yourself on these topics to understand them better before blaming all of your inferior culture's problems on my own.
 
Last edited:
Your irrational hatred is nearly boundless. The US is nowhere near to the worst offenders in terms of human trafficking. You know that, right? Want to know 8 of the worst nations as cited by the U.N. Global Report on Trafficking in Persons & the US Trafficking in Person's Report?
  • Russia
  • China
  • Iran
  • Belize
  • Venezuela
  • Belarus
  • North Korea
  • Syria

Did i said that the US is the worst? no, i merely said that criminalizing the victims is wrong, and of these countries you mentioned.

l_snb_e2ae497c451f227a735c3a16ad90f139


Weird, its almost as if criminalization of prostitution only helps traffickers because the victims cant go to the authorities since they are branded "criminals".

Those are Tier 3 countries. Cuba, Bolivia, Nicaragua, and Guatemala are on the Tier 2 "Watch List". Mexico and nearly the entire remainder of Latin America rank in Tier 2. Chile, Colombia, and Guyana are the only South American countries that make Tier 1. Not a single Central American country makes Tier 1.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism

YI've never been so envious of an island; not being attached to Latin America certainly has its perks.

Thanks for conceding the point about the land vs sea route. See its easier to debate when you are honest.
 
Did i said that the US is the worst? no, i merely said that criminalizing the victims is wrong, and of these countries you mentioned.

l_snb_e2ae497c451f227a735c3a16ad90f139


Weird, its almost as if criminalization of prostitution only helps traffickers because the victims cant go to the authorities since they are branded "criminals".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism

Thanks for conceding the point about the land vs sea route. See its easier to debate when you are honest.
Have you really been reduced to posting a color-coded global map showing the legal status of prostitution? This has nothing to do with the rates of human or sex trafficking in those countries! Otherwise South America would be caked in illegal status, and sub-Saharan Africa would be all green. Did you even review the reports?

You are trying to argue (weak) correlation as causation. You commit the exact same mistake in perceiving US drug policy as the driver behind your involvement in the drug trade, and also your misreading of what the UK's lack of contiguity to an uncontrolled Mexican channel of drugs and people entails, or what argument that comment serves. If you did understand this, you might notice a gaping flaw in your logic: Madagascar. Let's see if you can unpack that.

India doesn't share a land bridge with Mexico, either, but it has become their preferred port of illegal entry into our country if you noticed another of @waiguoren's recent threads.

Read more; presume Americans your intellectual inferiors less. It has taken little time to deconstruct your ignorance for all of Sherdog to observe.
 
I hope they hear about this in prison. Fucking scum!
 
Have you really been reduced to posting a color-coded global map showing the legal status of prostitution? This has nothing to do with the rates of human or sex trafficking in those countries! Otherwise South America would be caked in illegal status, and sub-Saharan Africa would be all green. Did you even review the reports?

Can you focus one bit on the crux of the issue? im not even going to try and derail this issue with the criminalization of sex workers and why it is a bad thing.

The point in bringing sex workers in the first place was a logical fallacy in the first place

"legalize drugs? may as well legalize slavery, DERP"

You are trying to argue (weak) correlation as causation. You commit the exact same mistake in perceiving US drug policy as the driver behind your involvement in the drug trade, and also your misreading of what the UK's lack of contiguity to an uncontrolled Mexican channel of drugs and people entails, or what argument that comment serves. If you did understand this, you might notice a gaping flaw in your logic: Madagascar. Let's see if you can unpack that.

You can spin it as much as you want, the premise still stands.

India doesn't share a land bridge with Mexico, either, but it has become their preferred port of illegal entry into our country if you noticed another of @waiguoren's recent threads.

If as you said "land is meaningless" why are they not immigrating directly into the US? why are they going all the way to Ecuador and taking a land route from Ecuador to Mexico?

Read more; presume Americans your intellectual inferiors less. It has taken little time to deconstruct your ignorance for all of Sherdog to observe.

No, i dont presume Americans are intellectually inferior.

I do presume you are intellectually dishonest.
 
Can you focus one bit on the crux of the issue? im not even going to try and derail this issue with the criminalization of sex workers and why it is a bad thing.

The point in bringing sex workers in the first place was a logical fallacy in the first place

"legalize drugs? may as well legalize slavery, DERP"

You can spin it as much as you want, the premise still stands.

If as you said "land is meaningless" why are they not immigrating directly into the US? why are they going all the way to Ecuador and taking a land route from Ecuador to Mexico.

No, i dont presume Americans are intellectually inferior.

I do presume you are intellectually dishonest.
Human trafficking is about more than sex trafficking, but I will focus by not addressing that ignorance; rather the fact that the legalization of sex workers clearly doesn't cause (nor enjoy any linear correlation) to the liberalization of sex worker laws. Madagascar is a wonderful example illustrating two of my points; it is an island, where legalization of prostitutes is legal, and yet it is a "Tier 2: Watch List" or Tier 2b country in terms of human trafficking: one of the worst. No land bridge to pretend the problem is hopeless, nor to blame it on someone else.

I never said "land is meaningless". I pointed out that land was originally an ineffective trade route for the drug lords, but due to the fact competent nations can successfully control air/sea as ports of entry, the drug lords had to turn to this route, and that route has become more effective than either of the previous preferred routes because it was able to co-opt and disappear into the perpetual migrant flood.

The premise is simple. A large, physical wall is an effective physical deterrent against encroachment via the most facile, and currently most problematic form of migration: the land bridge. If we understand that the river of drugs has been inextricably married to this migrant river, then we understand the necessity of stopping it, and how this will benefit both our nations. That has been demonstrated in this thread, and you yourself cannot deny this truth because you worked so hard to talk about the nature of the drug source, who controls it, and why Canada-- who also shares a land bridge-- isn't the burden to Americans seeking to control and stymie the drug trade. I spared myself additional legwork by manipulating you into making these arguments yourself in my dual-trolltrap thread last month.

Drug prohibition is unarguably more effective at deterring heroin use than a legal market, or even (more specifically) a pseudo-legal market. Honest attempts to understand why we are losing this war all point to you, and to our porous border. Separating children from their parents isn't an effective or humane way of ending this flood; especially when we consider how our dollars helped to create such a violent state some reasonably flee in search of "asylum". After all, Venezuela and Nicaragua are shitty socialist states that murder their own people, so of course some of these refugees have such a legitimate claim. This separation policy only creates an environment where the drug cartels and gangs can more effectively prey on and co-opt the migrant stream.

No, the honest solution to stemming their power, and gaining a leg up on the drug war, isn't to divide families, and it isn't to legalize hard drugs. The honest answer to this problem is that the key lies with controlling the migrant flood. We have to keep you out to sort the good from the bad, and to prevent the bad from achieving their base of power which is the disproportionate spending power they yield from drug sales in the American market.

It worked against the Mongols. It can work much more modestly for us. It was never my priority, or my desire, but if I am honest with myself, I can see no alternative effective long-term solution to the problem that could be projected by the state. Reduced costs of supply mean nothing in a market where demand is elastic.
 
Human trafficking is about more than sex trafficking, but I will focus by not addressing that ignorance; rather the fact that the legalization of sex workers clearly doesn't cause (nor enjoy any linear correlation) to the liberalization of sex worker laws. Madagascar is a wonderful example illustrating two of my points; it is an island, where legalization of prostitutes is legal, and yet it is a "Tier 2: Watch List" or Tier 2b country in terms of human trafficking: one of the worst. No land bridge to pretend the problem is hopeless, nor to blame it on someone else.

I dont know shit about Madagascar to make an informed opinion and its too damn far outside of the scope of the discussion. You are simply trying to derail up until a point that its too tiresome to chase and will reply with "concession accepted".

FACT is that its far easier to smuggle through land routes than water routes, by a freaking lot.

I never said "land is meaningless". I pointed out that land was originally an ineffective trade route for the drug lords, but due to the fact competent nations can successfully control air/sea as ports of entry, the drug lords had to turn to this route, and that route has become more effective than either of the previous preferred routes because it was able to co-opt and disappear into the perpetual migrant flood.

So you do agree with me now?

The premise is simple. A large, physical wall is an effective physical deterrent against encroachment via the most facile, and currently most problematic form of migration: the land bridge. If we understand that the river of drugs has been inextricably married to this migrant river, then we understand the necessity of stopping it, and how this will benefit both our nations. That has been demonstrated in this thread, and you yourself cannot deny this truth because you worked so hard to talk about the nature of the drug source, who controls it, and why Canada-- who also shares a land bridge-- isn't the burden to Americans seeking to control and stymie the drug trade. I spared myself additional legwork by manipulating you into making these arguments yourself in my dual-trolltrap thread last month.

And you have the nerve to criticize Trump? most drugs enter come through points of entry.

https://tucson.com/news/local/borde...cle_46653d40-7f63-5102-bb38-38da58c06a76.html

Drug prohibition is unarguably more effective at deterring heroin use than a legal market, or even (more specifically) a pseudo-legal market. Honest attempts to understand why we are losing this war all point to you, and to our porous border. Separating children from their parents isn't an effective or humane way of ending this flood; especially when we consider how our dollars helped to create such a violent state some reasonably flee in search of "asylum". After all, Venezuela and Nicaragua are shitty socialist states that murder their own people, so of course some of these refugees have such a legitimate claim. This separation policy only creates an environment where the drug cartels and gangs can more effectively prey on and co-opt the migrant stream.

False.

http://www.cbc.ca/news2/interactives/portugal-heroin-decriminalization/

It worked against the Mongols. It can work much more modestly for us. It was never my priority, or my desire, but if I am honest with myself, I can see no alternative effective long-term solution to the problem that could be projected by the state. Reduced costs of supply mean nothing in a market where demand is elastic.

Be my guest, i wonder which foreigners will you blame next when you realize that drugs are still readily available in your streets.
 
If he doesn’t have legal documentation, and is requesting entry into the US, he can be referred to as an “illegal alien”. I’m sure immigration law may have a different term for him.
Illegal alien implies, they are on this side of the border

Do you comprehend?
 
Human trafficking is about more than sex trafficking, but I will focus by not addressing that ignorance; rather the fact that the legalization of sex workers clearly doesn't cause (nor enjoy any linear correlation) to the liberalization of sex worker laws. Madagascar is a wonderful example illustrating two of my points; it is an island, where legalization of prostitutes is legal, and yet it is a "Tier 2: Watch List" or Tier 2b country in terms of human trafficking: one of the worst. No land bridge to pretend the problem is hopeless, nor to blame it on someone else.

I never said "land is meaningless". I pointed out that land was originally an ineffective trade route for the drug lords, but due to the fact competent nations can successfully control air/sea as ports of entry, the drug lords had to turn to this route, and that route has become more effective than either of the previous preferred routes because it was able to co-opt and disappear into the perpetual migrant flood.

The premise is simple. A large, physical wall is an effective physical deterrent against encroachment via the most facile, and currently most problematic form of migration: the land bridge. If we understand that the river of drugs has been inextricably married to this migrant river, then we understand the necessity of stopping it, and how this will benefit both our nations. That has been demonstrated in this thread, and you yourself cannot deny this truth because you worked so hard to talk about the nature of the drug source, who controls it, and why Canada-- who also shares a land bridge-- isn't the burden to Americans seeking to control and stymie the drug trade. I spared myself additional legwork by manipulating you into making these arguments yourself in my dual-trolltrap thread last month.

Drug prohibition is unarguably more effective at deterring heroin use than a legal market, or even (more specifically) a pseudo-legal market. Honest attempts to understand why we are losing this war all point to you, and to our porous border. Separating children from their parents isn't an effective or humane way of ending this flood; especially when we consider how our dollars helped to create such a violent state some reasonably flee in search of "asylum". After all, Venezuela and Nicaragua are shitty socialist states that murder their own people, so of course some of these refugees have such a legitimate claim. This separation policy only creates an environment where the drug cartels and gangs can more effectively prey on and co-opt the migrant stream.

No, the honest solution to stemming their power, and gaining a leg up on the drug war, isn't to divide families, and it isn't to legalize hard drugs. The honest answer to this problem is that the key lies with controlling the migrant flood. We have to keep you out to sort the good from the bad, and to prevent the bad from achieving their base of power which is the disproportionate spending power they yield from drug sales in the American market.

It worked against the Mongols. It can work much more modestly for us. It was never my priority, or my desire, but if I am honest with myself, I can see no alternative effective long-term solution to the problem that could be projected by the state. Reduced costs of supply mean nothing in a market where demand is elastic.
Please do tell how trafficking children has any other ending than the sex trade
 


Re-read what you wrote.

Now, here's the statement from your article:

CBP statistics show 81 percent of the 265,500 pounds of hard drugs caught at the U.S.-Mexico border from fiscal year 2012 to fiscal year 2016 were stopped by customs officers at ports of entry, rather than by Border Patrol agents working in the desert and wilderness between ports.

-------------------
Can you find your error?
 
Re-read what you wrote.

Now, here's the statement from your article:

CBP statistics show 81 percent of the 265,500 pounds of hard drugs caught at the U.S.-Mexico border from fiscal year 2012 to fiscal year 2016 were stopped by customs officers at ports of entry, rather than by Border Patrol agents working in the desert and wilderness between ports.

Maybe i missed something but i was trying to say that most drugs enter through legal points of entry, not through illegal immigrants or an unsecured border.
 
Please do tell how trafficking children has any other ending than the sex trade

He is going to pull out something like slavery in Mali or sweatshops in Bangladesh as if it was relevant somehow to a discussion about a first world country.
 
i was trying to say that most drugs enter through legal points of entry
You have presented no evidence for this claim. The article you posted does not demonstrate this.
 
It's fucked up, but honestly shit like this happens everyday in every country. I see shit like this (pedos raping children) on the local news constantly. There are a lot of sick people out there and a lot of them are good at blending in. My computer teacher in HS was a guy who EVERYONE liked and thought was a really cool guy, which he seemed to be. Well the year after he was arrested for molesting a 9 year old girl numerous times who he was supposed to be "tutoring" as a fucking special ed teacher and videotaped all of it. They also found hundreds of photos and videos of child pornography on his computer. I don't know how much time he got total but i think it was only like 5-10 years at most, which is bullshit.
 
Wait what? How does it not?

Your claim:

most drugs enter through legal points of entry

The claim in the article that you posted:

most drugs confiscated at the border are carried by immigrants passing through legal points of entry, not by those apprehended for crossing the border illegally


Lots of drugs come through the southern border that are not confiscated. How many illegal border crossers evade detection each year? What will the be market value of the drugs carried by those people? What about the value of the drugs that successfully pass through ports of entry? We don't know the answer to these questions.
 
Back
Top