LucidSDreamr
Bluelighter
Actually the DEA only exists, gets funding, and is judged by its successful prosecution of violations of existing drug law.
It has nothing to do with drugs.
It has to do with legislative intent.
There are plenty of drugs that aren't controlled by the DEA. In fact, every single unscheduled drug is not under the purview of the DEA.
So it is completely incorrect to say the DEA is judged on prosecution of drugs. It's judged on the prosecution of the violation of drug laws which is a completely different thing.
There is nothing about judging them whatsoever in my post. Nothing about their efficacy or lack thereof.
My post was about what gets the DEA more money:
1. Massive out of control fent deaths of rich white kids
2. Elimination of addiction and deaths and we finally all overcome addiction and nobody dies.
Which scenario 1 or 2 do you think will cause Congress to funnel more money to the DEA and expand their already autonomous power to do whatever they want without legislation being passed?
1. Is the obvious answer so why would the dea not help worsen the situation when they get more money out of doing so?
If we achieve 2 there is no need for a DEA to exist anymore