Cops Like Me Say Legalize All Drugs. Here's Why.

[Jabberwocky]

^
hopefully but...you cant teach stupid.lol

uh yes you can, it's just a lil bit harder.

 

[SB1981]

Very informative and refreshing to read about a former cop who sees that the war on drugs is nothing more than bullshit and is also counter productive with its actions; locking someone up for possession is ridiculous and pointless. Thanks for posting this well written piece.

 

[sub21lime]

Wow, what a well written article. I'm definitely going to show some friends and family this. Man, I wish more people thought like this.

 

[Movemauser]

It's clear that political corruption is somehow involved with preserving prohibition. I did type a more comprehensive comment but I was frozen out of the server and I expect that was thanks to someone who didn't agree with me. Doesn't matter. Anyway, thanks for the article. Good to know that although the law is against us, not all who enforce it are. Cheers.

 

[ro4eva]

It's clear that political corruption is somehow involved with preserving prohibition. I did type a more comprehensive comment but I was frozen out of the server and I expect that was thanks to someone who didn't agree with me. Doesn't matter. Anyway, thanks for the article. Good to know that although the law is against us, not all who enforce it are. Cheers.

Did it say the server was busy or down for maintenance?

I've had the same thing happen to me countless time in my time here. But I seriously doubt there's anyone deliberately blocking your comment.

Best thing to do before posting a long comment is to press CTRL + A (which will select all the text), then CTRL + C (which copies the selected text).

This way, if the server does end up being busy or down, you can open Notepad and paste your comment.

Just an idea.

 

[Movemauser]

Did it say the server was busy or down for maintenance?

I've had the same thing happen to me countless time in my time here. But I seriously doubt there's anyone deliberately blocking your comment.

Best thing to do before posting a long comment is to press CTRL + A (which will select all the text), then CTRL + C (which copies the selected text).

This way, if the server does end up being busy or down, you can open Notepad and paste your comment.

Just an idea.

Thanks Roeva.

Please could you share the evidence that supports your doubt? I'm a cynic and a skeptic, you see. So I don't want to guess - I need to know.

 

[pmoseman]

This article is poorly written.

 

[herbavore]

This issue causes me some serious cognitive dissonance. I can't get behind having certain drugs legalized, and packaged for sale (by profit driven big corporations/med industry, no less, who the hell do you think is going to be top dog in this scenario?). I'm thinking drugs like opiates, meth, GABA stuff... mostly the harder stuff with serious abuse potential and serious withdrawal syndromes. I just can't support that kind of free for all. Drugs can easily fuck people up, even when the struggles of availability/price are removed.

Decrim? Sure. All the way. Harm reduction, no more prison for smaller amounts, all that stuff. Possibly clinics/doctors that can prescribe a current addict his DOC under certain regulations. But that's where some of the dissonance comes in... it's like you have to have people illegally selling the drugs to get them, and only after that can you get them legally. It's weird. Legal drugs would be a regulatory nightmare... and not something I'd want on store shelves that 18 year olds could go buy, freely, cheaply and easily (More dissonance, I know there's no age limits on illegal drugs). Not in this irresponsible society, not for a long time yet.

I agree that decriminalizing is the way to go and I actually think that is what LEAP supports but it doesn't make the nice acronym like legalize does. The way I see it right now is that we know what does not work--we actually have two great models for that: 1) the criminalizing of people for illegal drug use(the War on Drugs) and the drugging of america for profit with legal drugs (the War on the Self). I often wonder about the problems that would ensue were we to legalize everything. It is naive to think that there would not be problems in a culture that worships the myth of the magic bullet for all unhappiness, discomfort and fear. At the same time I continue to passionately support that alternative to what we have now. In my ideal world we would have a whole slew of new wars. A War on Cultural Mythologies? A War on Traditional Education? War on Capitalism? War on Image Driven Marketing? Drug abuse and addiction, with legal or illegal drugs, has complex roots. Arguing about what to do about that pesky flower at the top is simplistic and does not take the conversation far enough.

It is not really hard to imagine a society in which people used substances in moderation to change their consciousness (for the benefit of themselves and the community, for spiritual connection, relaxation and fun) because traditional societies have always included this experience. What is different in our big free for all experiment in modern industrialized cultures is that we have lost most of the glue and traditions that could hold this practice in place. It is not possible to recreate what existed in traditional small societies (nor would I want to) but we do have to be sure that as proponents of legalization or decriminalization we address far more than our "rights" to freely use mind altering substances and medicines. We need to constantly be aware of the vulnerabilities in our culture that lead to the epidemic of addiction that we are now experiencing.

On another note: I am going to the annual WVC conference again this year and I notice they have a speaker from LEAP lined up. I have TONS of questions I hope there will be time for. I'm really excited to meet an actual member that I can converse with.

 

[spacejunk]

I think the concept of "regulation" gets lost in this debate too much.

Not necessarily treating people's use/consumption as a matter to concern the state (or whatever governing body) - but regulation in the sense that safe, pure, drugs (as opposed to adulterated, diluted, potentially contaminated black market wares with no quality control, nobody ensuring that the dosages are safe, or accurate) - that any added ingredients (active or inactive) are as harmless as possible.


Decriminalisation sounds like a nice middle-ground, but to me it is a form of political fence-sitting that fails to address some of the biggest problems with prohibition; dangerous substances of questionable purity, possibly adulterated or misrepresented as a drug it is not - or a cocktail of potentially dangerous chemicals. So important in these days, where new substances are hitting the consumer recreational market (or "research chemical scene") at a rate unprecedented in human history.
This is just a start.

Then we still have a crazy situation where people are allowed to possess the goods made/grown/peddled by other people who remain "criminals" in the eye of the law.
Is this not like legalising the possession of stolen goods, whilst still prosecuting thieves?

As things stand, we have a free-for-all.
The social consequences of the illegal drug trade is notorious for corruption, exploitation, violence.
The most ruthless prosper (I'm talking on a global scale here) while the history of drug prohibition has countless victims strewn in its wake - from peasant farmers in developing countries, the thousands killed in turf wars of cartel battles - to the low level traffickers/smugglers/drug mules that are expendable to their employers and suffer terribly in situations where they are caught in a jurisdiction violently hostile to drugs.

The human suffering from using and possessing personal quantities of drugs cannot be ignored any more - I'm glad we are finally seeing a discourse in many countries about this - it is a step in the right direction.

But I worry that some of the trickier issues - requiring far bolder decisions (not to mention international cooperation on such a culturally/historically loaded subject) from lawmakers and political leaders - regarding drug prohibition (and the many terrible things it has created in this world) are being overlooked for the 'close to home' element of this enormous underground economy/culture.

It sounds nice for vulnerable people to not also face legal persecution for their drug use - it is absurd that people still do - but we need to remember where these drugs come from, where the money goes...and how little concern some of the biggest players in the world drug market seem to have for end-users (the heavily levamisole-adulterated cocaine that is reportedly cut at the source of production is a classic example of this) and human life/dignity in general.
Prohibition as spawned some truly frightful criminal cultures the world over - and decriminalising drug use continues to benefit the many producers/growers/manufacturers/smugglers and their cartels, syndicates, gangs or other organisations that do whatever it takes to sell whatever it is people are willing to pay black market big bucks for.
Not saying all dealers or underground drug cultivators/manufacturers are bad people (love your work, folks!) but the human and environmental cost of the illegal drug industry (putting aside drug users for a moment is enormous by any reckoning.

No easy answers here...but decriminalistion fails to take the less visible victims of "the drug war" into account.
I think we need to tackle this problem on a larger, international scale.
Enough of the secrets, the corruption and the lies.

My feeling is that international agreements need to be made in order to not just make this yet another game of geopolitical, neo-imperialistic game for the wealthy nations to screw the developing countries that rely on production of illegal drugs to illeviate poverty and everything that goes with it.
It's such a complicated issue, which is why I think it needs do be handled as pragmatically and collaboratively as possible.

You may say I'm a dreamer...

 

[ro4eva]

Thanks Roeva.

Please could you share the evidence that supports your doubt? I'm a cynic and a skeptic, you see. So I don't want to guess - I need to know.

I do not have any objective evidence to share with you, because I wasn't present when you claimed that your comment was deleted.

That said, my doubt regarding your lost comment is based on years of experience here where I have had many of my comments deleted. Usually when this occurs, the moderator who deleted your comment will let you know about it being deleted via PM or in the thread itself.

Plus, AFAIK, the HTML programming language and its extensions are not capable of interrupting internet packets so as to have a moderator decide on the fly whether to block or delete comment within the incoming packet(s).

 

[bunge]

uh yes you can, it's just a lil bit harder.

Ok, ill clarify that by saying you cant teach stupid certain things....like quantum physics or advanced pharmacology or the impact of pointless legislation against drugs and the wider problems this causes within a community.

Hence, you cant teach stupid (this).

 

[herbavore]

I think the concept of "regulation" gets lost in this debate too much.

Not necessarily treating people's use/consumption as a matter to concern the state (or whatever governing body) - but regulation in the sense that safe, pure, drugs (as opposed to adulterated, diluted, potentially contaminated black market wares with no quality control, nobody ensuring that the dosages are safe, or accurate) - that any added ingredients (active or inactive) are as harmless as possible.


Decriminalisation sounds like a nice middle-ground, but to me it is a form of political fence-sitting that fails to address some of the biggest problems with prohibition; dangerous substances of questionable purity, possibly adulterated or misrepresented as a drug it is not - or a cocktail of potentially dangerous chemicals. So important in these days, where new substances are hitting the consumer recreational market (or "research chemical scene") at a rate unprecedented in human history.
This is just a start.

Then we still have a crazy situation where people are allowed to possess the goods made/grown/peddled by other people who remain "criminals" in the eye of the law.
Is this not like legalising the possession of stolen goods, whilst still prosecuting thieves?

As things stand, we have a free-for-all.
The social consequences of the illegal drug trade is notorious for corruption, exploitation, violence.
The most ruthless prosper (I'm talking on a global scale here) while the history of drug prohibition has countless victims strewn in its wake - from peasant farmers in developing countries, the thousands killed in turf wars of cartel battles - to the low level traffickers/smugglers/drug mules that are expendable to their employers and suffer terribly in situations where they are caught in a jurisdiction violently hostile to drugs.

The human suffering from using and possessing personal quantities of drugs cannot be ignored any more - I'm glad we are finally seeing a discourse in many countries about this - it is a step in the right direction.

But I worry that some of the trickier issues - requiring far bolder decisions (not to mention international cooperation on such a culturally/historically loaded subject) from lawmakers and political leaders - regarding drug prohibition (and the many terrible things it has created in this world) are being overlooked for the 'close to home' element of this enormous underground economy/culture.

It sounds nice for vulnerable people to not also face legal persecution for their drug use - it is absurd that people still do - but we need to remember where these drugs come from, where the money goes...and how little concern some of the biggest players in the world drug market seem to have for end-users (the heavily levamisole-adulterated cocaine that is reportedly cut at the source of production is a classic example of this) and human life/dignity in general.
Prohibition as spawned some truly frightful criminal cultures the world over - and decriminalising drug use continues to benefit the many producers/growers/manufacturers/smugglers and their cartels, syndicates, gangs or other organisations that do whatever it takes to sell whatever it is people are willing to pay black market big bucks for.
Not saying all dealers or underground drug cultivators/manufacturers are bad people (love your work, folks!) but the human and environmental cost of the illegal drug industry (putting aside drug users for a moment is enormous by any reckoning.

No easy answers here...but decriminalistion fails to take the less visible victims of "the drug war" into account.
I think we need to tackle this problem on a larger, international scale.
Enough of the secrets, the corruption and the lies.

My feeling is that international agreements need to be made in order to not just make this yet another game of geopolitical, neo-imperialistic game for the wealthy nations to screw the developing countries that rely on production of illegal drugs to illeviate poverty and everything that goes with it.
It's such a complicated issue, which is why I think it needs do be handled as pragmatically and collaboratively as possible.

You may say I'm a dreamer...

Lots of food for thought in my brain in your post. I see what you mean about a kind of fence-sitting especially when it comes to the global destruction the drug manufacturing and disbursement has caused. I've seen it first hand in Mexico, Central America and South America. Many of the most gentle and peaceful cultures are the most devastated.

I think Latin America is going to lead the way on this. It was disappointing that the OAS did not come up with a unified strategy at their 2013 conference in Guatemala (as many had hoped) but the conversation is at least happening.

 

[abracadabra girl]

I think the concept of "regulation" gets lost in this debate too much.

Not necessarily treating people's use/consumption as a matter to concern the state (or whatever governing body) - but regulation in the sense that safe, pure, drugs (as opposed to adulterated, diluted, potentially contaminated black market wares with no quality control, nobody ensuring that the dosages are safe, or accurate) - that any added ingredients (active or inactive) are as harmless as possible.

tl;dr; but if you're going where I think you're going with this, I totally agree. Cigs & Alc are legal, but I can't make hooch in my bathtub and sell it. The government ensures safe manufacture and enforces restrictions on who can purchase it. Currently illegal drugs, if legalized, would have to be regulated the same ways. I always assume that is part of any argument for legalization but I think you are wise to spell it out.

 

[spacejunk]

Lots of food for thought in my brain in your post. I see what you mean about a kind of fence-sitting especially when it comes to the global destruction the drug manufacturing and disbursement has caused. I've seen it first hand in Mexico, Central America and South America. Many of the most gentle and peaceful cultures are the most devastated.

I think Latin America is going to lead the way on this. It was disappointing that the OAS did not come up with a unified strategy at their 2013 conference in Guatemala (as many had hoped) but the conversation is at least happening.

Thanks Herbie - I wasn't calling you a fence-sitter by the way; I suppose I was appealing at what I know to be your enormous sense of empathy and compassion with a slightly different take on things.

I hear people say things along the lines of "full legalisation would just open the door to a large-scale society wide drug binge" (or sentiments along the lines of "decriminalisation is ok but legalisation would be terrible for society").

While I understand these fears, I think that the human/social/ecological toll of the black market drug industry as it is at the moment couldn't be much worse - drug use is rampant, unregulated, medically unsupervised, kids are poorly educated about various real drug issues - and there are nations being controlled or governed by narco-funded warlords, cartels and other organised crime groups - or teetering on the brink of civil war because of the West's lucrative appetite for the drugs we banned (and made everybody else ban too).

This is truly a global problem, and one which needs international goodwill (from at least a good number of the relevant nations) to come anywhere near a just solution.

Much respect Herbavore - love your work

 

[herbavore]

^the feeling is totally mutual. One thing I dream about is a Harm Reduction conference along the lines of the Psychedelic Sciences Conference that would draw not only the best minds working to end the drug war but all the representatives from countries that have a huge stake in this as well as some of the countries that are way ahead of us (I'm thinking Portugal) to educate people about the complexities they are facing and how they are handling them. So much gets done at an accelerated pace when you bring everyone together. At the PS conference my head was spinning from so much information but I came away more hopeful than I have felt in years about the therapeutic use of these drugs. A Harm Reduction Conference could move us miles from where we are simply by having all the interested parties come together to share ideas, inspire each other and work out strategies that take both our own country and all the affected countries into account. Imagine...a Harm Reduction think tank!

P.S. never thought you were referring to me as a fence sitter.

New edit: I just saw toothpastedog's post about the largest Harm Reduction Conference in NYC in 2016. I will be there. Bluelight should be too.

 

[Jabberwocky]

I do not have any objective evidence to share with you, because I wasn't present when you claimed that your comment was deleted.

That said, my doubt regarding your lost comment is based on years of experience here where I have had many of my comments deleted. Usually when this occurs, the moderator who deleted your comment will let you know about it being deleted via PM or in the thread itself.

Plus, AFAIK, the HTML programming language and its extensions are not capable of interrupting internet packets so as to have a moderator decide on the fly whether to block or delete comment within the incoming packet(s).

you being present or not would be irrelevant, he said he was 'froze out of the server'*, whatever the hell that means.. I've also had many comments deleted and, when that happened i'd almost always hear from a mod (tho he didn't even say if it was posted, then delted; his op was vague ie 'froze out of the server'), and, when i was a mod, I'd 100% pm ppl whose posts needed deleting; many/most bl mods are this way. If this is really chapping his nuts he should pm the relevant subforum mod where it happened and ask, tho it reads more like he had(or bl) had a technical glitch, not something where his individual post was singled out (and certainly not by a 3rd party as he suggests, that just smacks of batshit.crazy. I'm all about internet security, hell my recent started-threads indicate as much, but his post sounded like nonsense)
*bl freezes up all.the.goddamn.time. Luckily i haven't seen this in months, but i haven't been around much, and even less since the last 'big change'. But yes, this site's always had a history of terrible outages, that's not a conspiracy as he suggested but just weak tech.
//am unsure what your AFAIK was meant to convey, because, unless i missed a post or something, he didn't specify the way the way he thought his post was manipulated, and as far as hijacking internet(and isolated pc's) comm's goes, 'they' can do anything they want, (yes, i did phrase that in that manner, kinda hoping someone tries to call it out )
there's literally zero ways to comm online that're "un-interceptable"
[edit: i hyperlinked to something that'd prolly give that user a heart attack, lol. is weird that it made it an entirely new line instead of just reading properly..NSA? ]

Ok, ill clarify that by saying you cant teach stupid certain things....like quantum physics or advanced pharmacology or the impact of pointless legislation against drugs and the wider problems this causes within a community.

Hence, you cant teach stupid (this).

sorry i shoulda put more into that post, but i disagree w/ ^that. I imagine it was a poor attempt at hyperbole but things like adv pharma & quantum physics are about as close to comprehending the wastes of prohibition as understanding extreme snorkelling(sp?) Just a bad comparison. Both your examples require knowledge built upon prior knowledge built upon prior knowledge, whereas 'getting' the problems of drug prohibition is within the reach of illiterate, dumbass mf'ers everywhere.
Again i'm sorry i didn't elaborate in that post, I guess that i just see the issue of 'most drugs' as something that's within any sane persons' grasp and think that should be acknowledged/acted upon (I say that as a white.knight, because i'll be the 1st to admit that i'm not nearly as vocal about drugs irl as i could(/should) be )

 

[herbavore]

I agree, bmxx, that most anyone can grasp prohibition and discuss it. At my work, where blanket anti-drug talk is common in the staff room (elementary school teachers and staff), I find that the way to take the air out of even the most heated treatise against legalization is simply to ask if we could stop talking about other drugs and simply focus on the one we have chosen to legalize, alcohol. Once it is put in this context most people can see their own reactions are without basis. While I probably haven't changed any minds yet, at least we have discussions that don't always default back to the same fear-based starting point.

 

[ro4eva]

you being present or not would be irrelevant, he said he was 'froze out of the server'*, whatever the hell that means..

Well, if I was there with him, and I saw it happen - I could probably prove to him that it's not some moderator blocking his comment(s).

I've also had many comments deleted and, when that happened i'd almost always hear from a mod (tho he didn't even say if it was posted, then delted; his op was vague ie 'froze out of the server'), and, when i was a mod, I'd 100% pm ppl whose posts needed deleting; many/most bl mods are this way. If this is really chapping his nuts he should pm the relevant subforum mod where it happened and ask, tho it reads more like he had(or bl) had a technical glitch, not something where his individual post was singled out (and certainly not by a 3rd party as he suggests, that just smacks of batshit.crazy. I'm all about internet security, hell my recent started-threads indicate as much, but his post sounded like nonsense)

Or he could try using the latest version of Mozilla Firefox, as it now provides decent protection for these types of situations.

//am unsure what your AFAIK was meant to convey, because, unless i missed a post or something, he didn't specify the way the way he thought his post was manipulated, and as far as hijacking internet(and isolated pc's) comm's goes, 'they' can do anything they want, (yes, i did phrase that in that manner, kinda hoping someone tries to call it out )
there's literally zero ways to comm online that're "un-interceptable"
[edit: i hyperlinked to something that'd prolly give that user a heart attack, lol. is weird that it made it an entirely new line instead of just reading properly..NSA? ]

My mistake (big mistake) - I wrote HTML when I should have instead noted PHP. In any case, the argument I was trying to make was that, given the script-based nature of how vBulletin generally works, AFAIK, it is not possible for a moderator to randomly interrupt a user's comment - while it is still in the form of an outgoing/incoming IPv4 data packet - from being appended into the forum's SQL-driven database. It is however possible afterwards for a moderator to be alerted of (or notice) a specific post or thread and modify/edit/delete/lock its contents, provided (s)he has sufficient authorization.

Admittedly, my programming knowledge is rusty because I haven't worked in IT for a little over a decade. Therefore, if I am incorrect in my supposition, I sincerely apologize. It's just that I've never heard of a (third party) vBulletin moderator (a separate IP address) being able to intercept a high speed data packet which contains a vBulletin script in the form of a comment to be posted within a specific thread from a regular vB user (a second IP address), and then to be able to somehow stop it from reaching its destination, which is Bluelight.org (a third IP address).

My guess is that Movemauser finished typing a long, well-written, well-researched reply to another BLer's comment(s). And when he clicked on the "Post Quick Reply" button, it "didn't go through" because of either (1) connection issues; or (2) BL was down for maintenance; or (3) BL was busy due to a large volume of traffic. And based on his words, I'd guess it was the latter.

I've had all three of the above happen to me far too many times to count, and it has resulted in a lot of wasted time on my part, which is very frustrating. As a result, I now always copy my text to either my computer's Clipboard, or Notepad before attempting to post it.

I can totally sympathize with Movemauser's situation, as I'm no doubt sure that other BLers - who have ended up losing a lot of work - can as well. It's a really shitty feeling to have it happen. But to accuse BL moderators of being the cause of such an issue is unfounded. They're not moderators because they're assholes whole enjoy "blocking" random posts.

Sorry for the long reply, I'll shut up now.

 

[pmoseman]

tl;dr; but if you're going where I think you're going with this, I totally agree. Cigs & Alc are legal, but I can't make hooch in my bathtub and sell it. The government ensures safe manufacture and enforces restrictions on who can purchase it. Currently illegal drugs, if legalized, would have to be regulated the same ways. I always assume that is part of any argument for legalization but I think you are wise to spell it out.

Well you would if it wasn't easier to go to the store and steal alcohol or pay an adult to get it for you or have a bar employee that doesn't check your I.D.

 

[Jilly666]

Just stating the obvious.

I wish we could have everyone get on board with this. It won't fix much in the grand scheme of how fucked up the US is, but it's a compassionate start.

It's a screwed up world that's every country included.
We all no that they don't want drugs to be legalized, each individual country makes so much money from the drug dealer's and people at street level, crimes needed to keep the police in work, the drug agencies involved helping to come off it, then you got the big drug cartels paying governments huge back handers to turn a bling eye, it's a huge merry go round, and legalizing it would only help the addict. It could become far more affordable to the addict so they wouldn't have to go committing crime or go without food in their bellies and cold in order to fund there habits, some hard core drug users live very hard life to live, putting drugs before anything. In a ideal world how it could be is that drugs could be as cheap as probably ten percent what the current price is now, but wooha you can see where this is going already, quite possibly that is, instead of addicts then having more money in there pockets to live a normal life as in food in there bellies, electric in there homes to keep clean and warm that's if they can keep a roof over their heads, what's more likely to happen is they get greedy on the drugs and get greedier and greedier, cause I was speaking from a ideal rational world, and the majority of drug addicts are far from rational and only have the thoughts of now cause drugs are cheaper I can buy more and more, not partaking in some sort of normal existence for theirselves. To me the way forward should be educating the addict, what ever he is addicted to that's not really important, I don't see why people shouldn't be able to take a drug, as a drink is accepted for recreational purposes, at the end of a hard day at the office or driving the lorry, it's just educating people to function find there path in life and live some sort of normal life whatever normal is,(a cycle on the washing machine) LOL.. the last thing that a addict needs is becoming a criminal cause your that immediately, by simply buying the drug, never mind all the other ways you can be a criminal after that. There's always gonna be pro's and con's of anyway this problem is tackled, drink and now drugs have become part of mans life, so let's adapt to the problem in hand and not let it spiral out of control anymore than it already has
THE BIGGEST FACT OF ALL THIS IS THE MONEY THAT IT GENERATES THE WORLD OVER. Im nearly 50 years old started taking dope in my younger years as a way of relaxing occasionally, then when I was 34 found heroin and started taking that because life had worn me down problems with the kids, family life, money worries etc etc, I became a full blown addict, have done whatever bar prostitution to get my drug everyday since, lost my homes been on the streets, and guess what I was what I thought was a normal person, not a criminal addict. The thing is drink and drugs in time alter the way you think that's the chief thing that happens to you, so you loose sight of reality with all the problems poured on top, de-criminalize drugs make it a legal business just like alcohol is.
I've noticed over the last 10 years especially with drink it's acceptable and people want to down a can of beer at the shop just getting the lottery ticket. Why, why do people now function this way in there minds.
There's a bigger picture out there and don't get me started on that cause that's a huge topic to cover, how corrupt this world is, everyone needs to stop being so ignorant and open their eyes wide up. This world is on a one way ticket to doom, it's full of negativity and greed and hate for one another, if only man could understand and love one another, it's quite simple but very effective. I PROBABLY SOUND LIKE IM DREAMING BUT WHY SHOULD IT BE THAT WAY.

ITS HARD TO BE STAY POSITIVE WHEN THERE IS SO MUCH NEGATIVITY AROUND YOU.