Clark County Undersheriff Daniel Knowles followed his intuition during a traffic stop last week and brought in more than $1 million to be counted by Clark County officials.
Knowles, formerly a Lyon County Sheriff’s deputy, stopped a vehicle at Milepost 65 of U.S. Highway 54, just outside Minneola. He has been with the Clark County department since July of 2006.
“I became suspicious of the driver in the vehicle and the consent to search the vehicle was given,” Knowles said Tuesday afternoon.
He soon found a hidden compartment where the money was packed inside like drug currency.
“It even smelled like marijuana,” Knowles said. “It was far from legitimate.”
Sheriff’s and Clark County Treasurer’s staff worked about eight and a half hours counting the money.
“It was pretty painstaking,” Knowles said. “We had a total of about seven people counting. It’s get counted, recounted, and then counted again.”
When the counting was done, the total of the money seized was $1,017,183.
Paperwork has been filed with the Clark County Attorney’s office to allow him to begin the asset forfeiture proceedings against the money.
Knowles said that the federal Drug Enforcement Agency is assisting in an ongoing investigation of the incident. Names of those involved are not available.
Knowles got a new K-9 officer, Robby, a Belgian Malinois, in August of 2009. The human found the stash of cash before the K-9. However, Knowles ran the dog on the vehicle for practice and the dog, too, found the cash from the scent of drugs on it.
bigdog (anonymous) says...
Nice work by Knowles but wake up Kansans. How can our elected officials not make sure these dollars go into the state's general fund. The forfeiture laws need to be changed.
January 27, 2010 at 3:53 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
biscuitboy (anonymous) says...
More than the forfeiture laws need to change.
Sales tax alone on one million dollars is almost 80-K dollars. Add at least that much more in sin tax...coupled with the business taxes paid on an additional million dollars in sales....and a few more in add-on tax benefits and you have almost a quarter of a million dollars lost to the state in much needed revenue for every million dollars in illegal drug sales.
So they recovered this money...Ok...good work guys! But how many million more makes it through without detection that's lost to the state forever? Pass some sane laws legalizing and taxing these drugs and watch the state's general fund gain from it.
January 27, 2010 at 6:09 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
redgoat2009 (anonymous) says...
Great job, Knowles! You are one of the best!!!!!!!
January 27, 2010 at 10:42 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
zeepmonk (anonymous) says...
Haha - this guy continues to amaze me.
January 28, 2010 at 6:09 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
pokefan (anonymous) says...
Way to go. It would be nice to see the money in the state coffers. Many jobs are at stake due to financial crunch.
I am sure that this million is just a drop in the bucket, but at least their bucket has a hole in it and it is called Clark county.
January 28, 2010 at 9:40 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
enadrown (anonymous) says...
NO NO NO! They cannot keep this money, if they do, they should all be fired or voted out of office. These folks didn't have drugs on them, they weren't sited as having committed a crime, they weren't arrested. They had a million dollars and the police are going to use any reason they can think of to get it.. GREED!; that is a lot... of money! Whether it smelled like marijuana or not is not a crime and DOES NOT justify a seizure of the money if no crime was committed. Hey, I just got paid; US CURRENCY HAS THE HIGHEST TRACES OF COCAINE ON IT... 4 out of 5 American bills have COCAINE on them. Does that mean if i get pulled over the police can confiscate my paycheck? This is a prime example of government abusing the system.
January 28, 2010 at 10:13 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
sc66801 (anonymous) says...
What I would like to know is what it takes to become a suspicious driver?
January 28, 2010 at 10:13 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
ksresident (anonymous) says...
Amen enadrown! "Paperwork has been filed with the Clark County Attorney’s office to allow him to begin the asset forfeiture proceedings against the money." This should not be allowed and I hope a judge agrees!
January 28, 2010 at 11:02 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...
Yeah, I'm sure that it's all on the up and up. I know I always have a million $ or more in the hidden compartment in my car where I also happen to kept my extra weed scented air fresheners. Pretty normal behavior for most of us I bet.
January 28, 2010 at 11:57 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
koalemos (anonymous) says...
If I were a law enforcement officer who seized 1 million dollars from a Mexican drug lord, I wouldn’t want my name released to the public. I wouldn’t want the location of the seizure released either. Mexican drug lords have Google, they don’t respect boarders and they have no respect for the law.
January 28, 2010 at 11:59 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
enadrown (anonymous) says...
I am not saying that I think this money was going to be donated to the Haiti earthquake victims. I am not even going to pretend that I think this was for any sort of legitimate purpose or business; but does that give the police the right to seize it when there was no actual crime committed? If they had found drugs, I would concede that is one of the dangers of dealing with drugs and I would agree that the police rightly seized it. But Get real, this is just another violation that could affect us all later. I am a money saver; its not in the bank. One day I will carry my cash to purchase a house or a car; no it will not be 1 million dollars, but does that give police the right to take it if I get pulled over simply because it's a large amount of money? No wonder they hid the money.. if the cops can pull you over and just take it because its a large amount of money they were RIGHT to try to hide it. For now I'm going to leave my money in the ground and make them work for it.
January 28, 2010 at 12:51 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
biscuitboy (anonymous) says...
I agree enadrown. And it has happened where people were carrying large amounts of cash for legal reasons which was confiscated and it took years to get it back if at all.
Too many people have their heads in the sand about this sort of thing until it happens to them.
January 28, 2010 at 5:40 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
BongJovi (anonymous) says...
I don't understand how they can just take this persons money. What crime did the driver commit that allows the police to seize his money? Sounds like the police are out of control in this hick town.
January 28, 2010 at 6:30 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
enadrown (anonymous) says...
it doesn't sound like they did commit any crime besides for transporting a large amoung of money.. the article would have said if they had found so much as a seed or a roach. Im also amazed that even though the money "smelled of marijuana" the dog wasn't the one that found it, an officer did. Shouldn't the dog have hit on it first if it was truly "marijuana scented"? This literally just sounds like highway robbery.
January 28, 2010 at 6:44 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
MadMack (anonymous) says...
SO ... what is the rest of the story?
January 28, 2010 at 7:12 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
neighbor (anonymous) says...
The rest of the story is the drug/crime cartel are out $1,017,183.00, two mules are without work(perhaps life later), and the Clark Co SO may have just found a way to avoid not having to cut their equipment budget for many many years. I highly doubt Clark Co will get all of the money, the DEA will probably step in and take the case to Federal Court because of that large amount of money.
Drug Forfeiture money and funds derived from the sales of property seized in drug related cases have be placed into a special account that can only be used for LEO equipment purchases. It cannot be used for wages or daily operational expenses. The money cannot be put in any City, County, or State general fund, records of it's use must be maintained as directed by state statute(public record information folks, you can check and see how every dime of it is spent).
I wondered where Knowles had went to, he used to make alot of big busts in this area. He sure has a nose for the traffickers on the roadways.
January 29, 2010 at 10:02 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
bigdog (anonymous) says...
Kansans are seeing unprecedented shortfalls in funds. In our county we are going to have to close schools and tax people making under 30k more to make up the shortfalls. When have you heard the Sheriff say he could not afford to run his department.We have seen charges filed against officers and others just go away. Tens of millions of forfeiture dollars are being used all over the state to buy equipement that is not needed to run a county sheriff department. We are asking officers that are underpaid to be super human and not be tempted. Profiling is affecting honest people. We need to use forfeiture funds to shore up Kansas.
January 29, 2010 at 10:35 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
ToxicPink (anonymous) says...
Some of my clothes used to smell like marijuana, I'm glad those weren't ever confiscated randomly. =o
January 29, 2010 at 10:55 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
giggles (anonymous) says...
Sorry neighbor, but what you say is not the rest of the story. It seems as though there was no real probable cause or any proof that it was drug money. I see this ending badly for law enforcement. Illegally seizing someones money without proof will only make it harder in the future for them to actually catch them. I can see this turning into a big issue and cry against a police state.
My husband and I were accosted by a couple of officers here in town several years ago. They followed us into a parking lot, and when we got out they approached us and said my husband smelled of marijuana. We both told them they were free to search our car. They did. Then they asked why there was a bag of charcoal briquets in our back seat. We told them for our grill, as summer was coming on and we enjoyed grilling. Then separated us and started asking us questions. I was probably 7 or 8 months pregnant at the time, and one officer kept asking me if I had ever seen my husband smoke pot or deal pot. I was floored! Apparently the officer asking my husband questions was asking him if he smoked pot. The answer was no. Then they asked if we knew people who smoked it. I said I didn't know. I suppose people I knew could smoke it, but I wasn't aware of it. After about 20 minutes of this questioning, they let us go. I was worried for a minute that they might arrest my husband for suspicion of marijuana. I knew that they couldn't do that, but what were we going to do about it if they did? We didn't have the money to fight it.
My point is, police doing things because they can, is very dangerous for society.
January 29, 2010 at 11:39 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
koalemos (anonymous) says...
The "mule" who lost this money doesn't have a good excuse. As far as his drug lord is concerned, since this guy wasn't shot in a chase or a shootout, he didn't try hard enough to protect the money. He will be punished so the rest of the mules will see that they should at least fight the law. Eventually, the police will end up with a much more violent drug carrier than what they have now. The drug lord living in Mexico will not come here and do the dirty work or risk prison. He will continue to pay ex-special forces incredible amounts of cash to train his private army. One of the techniques used in Mexico is to rig the vehicle up with explosives so if law enforcement searches the vehicle and touches the secret compartment, the vehicle explodes killing everyone in and around the vehicle. I'm telling you, these criminals have no respect for human life.
January 29, 2010 at 12:18 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
giggles (anonymous) says...
Koalemos, you are assuming an awful lot from such little information. It seems as there was no evidence of drugs, other than a smell, that even a drug dog could detect.
January 29, 2010 at 12:25 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
eyesnot (anonymous) says...
It's pretty obvious the police are digging a huge hole for themselves. Always thinking they are above the law, this time, they better back off and quick. Too many people in America, where there is REAL law, are reading about this obviously tainted confiscation. Maybe the folks behind the million may have gotten the money from ill gain, but the method of discovery is as illegal as a bank robber in a bank. From the looks of things, the cops aren't too clean in this town. What a joke "smelled like marijuana. Burning leaves in the fall time smell like marijuana.
January 29, 2010 at 12:38 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...
I find that most people have a million $ or 2 stashed in their car's hidden compartment. I think that is why the economy is so messed up. Everybody just keeps their millions tucked away in their car's hidden compartment instead of spending their hidden caches of money thus stimulating the economy. There is certainly nothing suspicious about a million dollars in a hidden compartment. That's for sure.
January 29, 2010 at 12:39 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...
Criminals are the real victims. Yeah, yeah, let's believe that.
January 29, 2010 at 12:41 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
enadrown (anonymous) says...
the thing is NO ONE is denying the money is suspicious. but something being suspicious doesn't give anyone the right to just take it.. if they would have followed the folks and caught them doing a drug deal or seomthing, yes, take the money, but THERE WAS NO CRIME COMMITTED TO WARRANT THEM SEIZING THE MONEY!!! If you were to get pulled over and had $30,000 in your vehicle (imagine you were buying a new car) do the cops have a right to just take it? I guess so, because its a large amount of money and seems "suspicious".
January 29, 2010 at 1:18 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
biscuitboy (anonymous) says...
Legalize and control drugs and then these problems go away.....
January 29, 2010 at 1:23 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...
The problem is people tend to get controlled by drugs and it causes all sorts of problems for them and society. I know a guy who had a lot of "lost years" because of drugs. Making them legal won't take away the toll they take on the body and mind of the user. It's not compassionate to let someone destroy themselves.
January 29, 2010 at 1:28 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
goodoleboy (anonymous) says...
People destroy themselves through alcohol, cigarettes, food, money, etc. Pick your poison, all us end up the same in the end.It's been over 20 years since we declared "war on drugs" time for a new approach, this one has not worked.
January 29, 2010 at 1:31 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...
What approach would that be? I can't imagine a productive society where all drugs are legal. We have uncontrollable problems with the ones that are legal now. I'm not totally arguing with you, I just have a real hard time seeing legalizing all drugs working.
January 29, 2010 at 1:50 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
goodoleboy (anonymous) says...
By legalizing them they could be taxed, which could help pay for abuse programs and management. They can also be regulated to ensure safety. Not to mention that it would wipe out a huge market for criminals, and if it did not work we could always make them illegal again.
January 29, 2010 at 3 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
biscuitboy (anonymous) says...
Many...not all...but many, of the problems associated with drugs now are a direct or indirect result of their being illegal as much as a problem of the dug itself....
It has been argued that if one of the big pharma houses held the patent to THC marijuana would be legal today. Much can be said of some of the other illegals.
January 29, 2010 at 6:18 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
neighbor (anonymous) says...
We weren't there Giggles, but I'd be willing to bet the passengers of the car had no clue whose money it was, denied it was theirs, and I'd be willing to bet the car didn't belong to them either. The report says there was evidence of marijuana found in the compartment, it wasn't a case of someone not trusting their local credit union.
Do you think this seizure is something new? Or a rare event? It happens day in and day out across the entire USA in drug enforcement efforts. There are specific laws and guidelines that have to be followed, a court has to decide the final disposition of the money. For every one they find, dozens drive by the same area each week. The Narcs have seized houses with the walls lined with money like insulation, semi trailer loads of money, I saw a couple of senior citizens on a recent Cops show that had suitcases full of cash. One Granny told the cops to just take the cash for themselves and let them go on their way, they were just being paid to haul the money by drug dealers across the border in Mexico. One bust in Florida netted a warehouse full of money several years ago, cash stacked floor to ceiling on pallets!
January 29, 2010 at 10:21 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
koalemos (anonymous) says...
All I know is when I am driving down the highway and I see a police/sheriff car who has stopped a Hispanic ans is searching the car, I will steer clear so I won't become a victim of the war on drugs.
January 29, 2010 at 11:18 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
koalemos (anonymous) says...
Americas war on drugs started down in Columbia back in the 70's and has moved north since then. Now it is in the good old USA and it won't take long before the judge who earns $250,000 per year to start looking at $1,000,000,000.00 as enough to close an eye. Cops are already turning as a result and this is documented. Enjoy the fruit of your labors everyone!!!
January 29, 2010 at 11:23 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
biscuitboy (anonymous) says...
neighbor
And all that money just laying around in warehouses, the walls of houses, tractor-trailers, and granny's purse......all of it the cops didn't find....how many taxes were paid on any of it?. How much money in taxes was lost on those billions of dollars in drug sales that could have gone to increase schools funding so we didn't have to be shutting them down. How much of it could have been used to fund dealing with the problems caused by drug use rather than those problems being paid out of the already strapped general fund?
And rest assured, that million dollars....while a large amount....is quickly recovered by the artificially high price of illegal drugs when compared to production cost. If the cops were recovering any significant percentage at all the drug lords just change their procedures. It's an on-going cat and mouse game...and the real losers are we the tax payers. We lose not only in the lost tax revenue...we also lose in the cost we have to pay to continue playing the game.
You want to beat the drug lords? Legalize the drugs! Look what happened to the bootleggers after prohibition was repealed.
January 30, 2010 at 4:58 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
mythought (anonymous) says...
Ok people lets get real. Do I agree that there is a shortfall in the economy yes, but seriously it isn't our Sheriff's office who caused this mess...let the ones who caused it fix it, the higher ups! Our policeman work hard for us and I think throughtout all these comments I see one person saying thank you for getting drugs off our streets. So I will also say it THANK YOU to all of those who work in a dangerous enviroment to keep me and my family safe. Oh and just FYI, the man who this happened to, or course knew NOTHING about the money, so obviously he was saying it wasn't his. During the forteiture process if the money is his or someone else let them speak up and claim it, but I would just about be willing to bet not a sole will say it was theirs! Also, Daniel found the money first because his dog, Robbie was watching the man from running or pulling some other kind of stunt..that is his job!! If Daniel wouldn't have found the money you could guarantee Robbie would have!!
January 30, 2010 at 8:05 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
mythought (anonymous) says...
Ok, my bad there were more who said thank you they just had to add the BUT in there.
January 30, 2010 at 8:07 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
biscuitboy (anonymous) says...
Sometimes buts are important...but just in case you missed it mythought.....Good job!!!!
January 30, 2010 at 8:31 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
biscuitboy (anonymous) says...
I kinda believe that's what I have been trying to say...we need our legislatures to fix our drug laws by changing them.
January 30, 2010 at 8:32 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
mythought (anonymous) says...
Gotcha biscuitboy! All good thoughts!!!
January 30, 2010 at 10:40 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
sunshine (anonymous) says...
I have had mixed feelings about this concept of legalizing drugs for a long time. My husband says they should be legalized but I have an issue with it. I don't like the idea of my neighbors being able to legally buy meth or coke or heroin or any current street drug, or my kids school teachers, or my bankers, or grocery store owners. Sure, any of these people could be buying it illegally right now, but eventually it will catch up to them and they will suffer the consequences. If its legal, other than personal health hazards, what are the consequences. Think of all those people who will suddenly have more accesibility to those drugs and then you will know the consequences. If you have ever had a person you care deeply about have an addiction to a drug like meth, you would surely not want it legal. For those who argue the benefits of being able to tax it...ok, legalize it and tax the hell out of it. Do you think this will actually stop the drug cartels? Will this rid the world of drug dealers and sisters and brothers and friends who die of addictions? I don't think so. I just can't grasp the logic in making something like meth legal. I have conflicted feelings about things like cigarettes and alcohol. I enjoy an occasional drink, but somehow I think if it wasn't there I probably wouldn't miss it. I don't know what the answer is, but I have put a lot of thought into whether or not legalizing it is the way to go and I just can't find any justification for it.
January 30, 2010 at 12:19 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
biscuitboy (anonymous) says...
Thank you for a very thoughtful...non knee-jerk....response. And I guess in a real sense you have cut to the chase concerning this question. In many ways there are advantages both legally and financially to going the legalization route. And I obviously think that is the best route. But it also to a degree just writes of the moral and ethical questions that you raise. And to many those questions are worth the cost and burden required to continue their illegal status.
There are also degrees that might be considered. I personally think pot should be a given and be legalized immediately. And no, I don't smoke pot. In fact, ironically, the times I tried it always made me sick to my stomach. Meth is of course at the other end of that spectrum and should be looked at much more carefully. But as long as any of these items remain illegal you will guarantee that the drug lords will remain with a market and a business...and the problems will continue.
What I am mainly seeking is a serious dialogue on the subject where we can take a rational and unemotional look at a very costly problem for our society. Then we can decide. I thank you for making that appear possible
January 30, 2010 at 2:48 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
MadMack (anonymous) says...
I would think that the demand for these substances, and the queasiness of politicians is why the war on drugs is a sham. It is more like a mild disagreement with drugs and reminds me of the bs "fixes" for the illegal alien problem. We allow drug gangs to exist when if we were truly at war, we would be chasing them down and wiping them out, as we try to stay pc with real problems that need real solutions and solid responses. These wishy-washy policies do no one except the criminals a favor. Posse Comitatas doesn't apply once we cross the border. Either go full bore or let it go.
January 30, 2010 at 6:49 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
biscuitboy (anonymous) says...
MadMack
We don't go after them and wipe them out because we don't want the war to end.....we want the war to go on unabated as it has for years. We want it to go on because there are a lot of people in this country that make a living off of the war continuing just like it has. An entire industry has sprung up on the back of this war and the last thing that industry needs is for the war to end. That industry includes law enforcement....court personnel and attorneys.....all the counselors and treatment facilities.....the people that make and sell all the high tech gadgetry to fight the war...and the people who build and staff the prisons to house the losers. None of these people want the war to end...they just say they do.
January 30, 2010 at 7:08 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
MadMack (anonymous) says...
There seems to be alot of politicians saying one thing and doing another, but it has always been that way and Mark Twain and Will Rogers said it more eloquently than do I.
January 30, 2010 at 7:28 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...
bisquitboy,
So you're saying capitalism is to blame?
January 30, 2010 at 8:36 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...
sorry biscuitboy, I spelled your name wrong.
January 30, 2010 at 8:37 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
biscuitboy (anonymous) says...
seriouslyfolks
I fail to see your point other than your on-going attempt to somehow convince yourself and others that I am a communist. Well you just keep right on with it my friend because all you are really doing is showing how little you know about me or communism.
Maybe you should spend more time reading that communist web site your always going to so you might understand it better. Now if you want to debate the pros and cons of capitalism start a thread on the forum and I will be happy to discuss it with you. But other than that your snide little insinuations and digs are starting to get irritating. I gave you a reasonable response to your last inquiry on another thread which you chose to ignore only to move over here and start this. You are pretty transparent my friend and you will have to get up a lot earlier in the morning than you do to win the Joseph McCarthy memorial trophy.
January 31, 2010 at 4:28 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
biscuitboy (anonymous) says...
Posted by sunshine (anonymous) on January 30, 2010 at 12:19 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Sure, any of these people could be buying it illegally right now, but eventually it will catch up to them and they will suffer the consequences. If its legal, other than personal health hazards, what are the consequences.
If it is legal and other than personal health hazards there are no other consequences....Why is it illegal now?
You see that is the point I am trying to make. Most of the problems (read consequences), other than personal health hazards, are problems primarily because the drugs are illegal. Remove the illegality and most of those problems go away. The ones that don't are no different than the ones we currently have with alcohol...and we decided years ago those problems were preferable to the alternative of prohibition.
Them we turned right back around and started prohibition all over again with other drugs. The only difference was this time we didn't have Anheuser Busch and Hiram Walker to fight for the repeal.
January 31, 2010 at 6:19 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
koalemos (anonymous) says...
When we PROHIBIT something we give up control. A father who forbids his daughter from seeing boys condemns himself into never meeting the boys his daughter is seeing.
We regulate the sale of alcohol and license vendors who are required to follow our rules or loose their license and pay fines. In return, the profit for the unregulated market dries up and goes out of business.
We prohibit the sale of recreational drugs yet recreational drugs are sold anyway. It costs society a lot more money to react to the violation of our prohibition than it would to regulate the sales. We would gain control of the market and there would be no profit for the criminal element and the taxes would pay for enforcement.
January 31, 2010 at 12:22 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
biscuitboy (anonymous) says...
It is so good to see that somebody any way understands what is happening here. Thank you koalemos for being able to see the forest despite the trees that are in the way.
January 31, 2010 at 12:44 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
biscuitboy (anonymous) says...
I was hoping for more feed back on this thread....let's hear some other thoughts.....Anybody?
February 1, 2010 at 8:23 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...
http://www.whitehousedrugpolicy.gov/p...
The lifestyle that accompanies drug addiction has nothing to do with the fact that it is illegal, it has to do with the effects the drugs have on the person. The taxes collected from the sale of drugs will most likely be payed with money that was gotten by criminal means so it kind of defeats the purpose. When the government gives the green stamp of approval to drugs more people will likely try them and then become more dependent on them. The more the dependency on them, the more desperate they become for them, the more desperate they become the more they are willing to commit crime to pay for them. I see people every year try to come and work through a temp service who have the signs of someone who is addicted(meth seems to be popular 'round here) and they never seem to last very long. Holding down a job is not a common trait among addicts and since drugs cost money they will do whatever it takes(burglary,murder,etc) to get them.
February 1, 2010 at 9:42 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
koalemos (anonymous) says...
I'm against burglary
February 1, 2010 at 10:08 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...
Me too, but drug addicts don't have as much of a problem with it and that has nothing to do with drugs being illegal. I suppose that people think that the problem with burglary is that it is illegal.
February 1, 2010 at 11:14 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
glarson (anonymous) says...
moved to a forum:
http://www.emporiagazette.com/forums/...
February 1, 2010 at 1:56 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )