Drug Submarine

[Adelie]

Originally Posted by Bash

50 feet salt water (fsw) would equal 2.52 atmospheres. Don't forget that you're at 1 atm at sea level, so you have to add that in. The formula for salt water is x'/33 + 1 = ATM.

(Sorry. Retired Scuba Instructor. Couldn't resist.)

True,the absolute pressure on the hull will be 2.52 atm, but since the interior is at 1atm, the relative pressure is 1.52atm which is what the builders care about when trying to design it.

(Sorry. Engineer. Couldn't resist.)

[Bash]

oh. relative pressure. yeah.

[Pete7]

What makes you think the interior is only pressurised to 1 ATM (do you guys not use bars for pressure?)

If the inside was pressurised it would make keeping the water out whilst submerged an awful lot easier and since soda lime is now freely available in dive shops staying down for a while quiet possible.

What is scary is how much Charlie could you fit into a 30m sub They have only got to get though once.

Pete

Nuther Retd Scuba Instr

[PAR]

What's really scary is the wise investor will develop two or three of these projects, knowing one, possibly two will be "found" before it can get into service.

[Ahnlaashock]

Kind of off topic, but it addresses a statement made in the thread. Mods delete it if you deem it inappropriate.
2.8 million times 20 percent. Population of the Greater St. Louis area times the percentage of users.
A half ounce of regular times 15 percent, and an eighth to quarter of KB for the remaining 5 percent. A week. Take the low side and say 500,000 customers, or even be more conservative than that and call it 400,000 customers.
300k time half an ounce equals 150k ounces of weed a week. 150,000 divided 16 to reach pounds equals 4260 kilos of pot a week in the Greater St. Louis area alone.
You should run the numbers on a large metropolitan area some time.
Say I am crazy over estimating usage, and cut that in half if you want and we will settle at 2100 kilos of pot a week. This is regular field grown pot.
KB, or medicinal grade pot, 100,000 times one eighth of an ounce equals 12,500 ounces of KB. Say my numbers are crazy high and cut that in half. Settle on a flat 6k ounces of KB a week. 6000 divided by 16 equals 375 pounds of KB. 170 kilos of KB, a week.
The picture is even worse if you run the tax projections.
One sub is nothing to worry about, and mules don't carry that much across the border either.
A sub full of pure snow would still not fuel the market in the US for a month.
I will leave the politics alone.
I think the boat is interesting, and not really much of a threat to anyone or anything. The product is here on the streets everywhere without it ever being used. The only thing the war on drugs does is keep the price high enough that someone could have a dozen of those built and never worry what it cost with the river of billions flowing off shore.
Please picture the industry required to move and supply that much of an illegal substance. Then try to picture it being underground and supposedly unknown.

Off soap box now!

[GordMay]

Originally Posted by Ahnlaashock

Kind of off topic ... Mods delete it if you deem it inappropriate ...

Me too.

Criminal prohibition, the centerpiece of U.S. drug policy, has failed miserably. Those who benefit the most from prohibition are organized crime barons, who derive an estimated $10 to $50 billion a year from the illegal drug trade. Indeed, the criminal drug laws protect drug traffickers from taxation, regulation and quality control. Those laws also support artificially high prices, and assure that commercial disputes among drug dealers and their customers will be settled not in courts of law, but with automatic weapons in the streets.

An interesting paper by by Jeffrey A. Miron
➥ The economics of drug prohibition and drug legalization | Social Research | Find Articles at BNET

And, another by Nicholas V. Raquet
➥ The Politics Resource Center: The Negative Effects of Drug Prohibition and the "War on Drugs," by Nicholas V. Raquet

[skipmac]

Have to agree. Though not a PC opinion the war on drugs really exacerbates the drug problem instead of helping.

Users and addicts are forced to pay high prices which often sends them out to break into your house or boat to steal to support their habit. So bad for you and me.

Since the drugs are illegal addicts are reluctant to seek counseling to get off the drugs. So bad for the users

Drug money goes into funding large criminal organizations that then have huge money to fund other criminal activities. So bad for law enforcement.

Even US authorities will candidly admit that the war on drugs has failed. So not working.

I could go on and on but I think the point is made.

The biggest benefit to the war on drugs is to give politicians a popular drum to beat to get elected. Who is going to argue against get tough on crime/drugs position in an election campaign?

[GordMay]

Originally Posted by skipmac

... Who is going to argue against get tough on crime/drugs position in an election campaign?

Uh, that would be me, and the Marijuana Party of Canada.
➥ http://www.marijuanaparty.ca/index.en.php3

[TexSail]

IMHO, Willie Nelson had some good points when he recently advocated legalizing marijuana and focusing resources on meth and other much more harmful drugs. Maybe if we legalized pot, the farmers could make a few bucks and we would not have to pay them not to grow crops. Illegality = contraband = big $$$ for smuggling = big $$$ for political payoffs. Not a pretty picture.

I know Jamaica best of the Caribbean and there are a lot of otherwise good anchorages where you don't want to be at night lest you stumble into the drug trade inadvertently. The honest locals are terrified and the cops too often are on the take.

[David M]

I'm very much against drug usage but we seem to be going about it the wrong way. I'm starting to believe that taking the big money out of the business by legalizing it would rid us of most of the associated problems. When you step back and look at the big picture, its much more the trade than the users that are causing the problems. Take away the big money involved in the trade and the problems associated with the trade goes away. Its the law of supply and demand that would significantly drop the prices. And no, there would not be much tax money to be made, not taxes on something that has dropped significantly in price.

Where does the money come from? Much of it comes from people busting into cars, homes and possibly your boat to get the money. How much higher are our insurance premiums because of drug addicts busting into peoples property because drugs are so expensive?

We also have to pay more money for law enforcement, attorneys and prisons. Again, this is ultimately paid through our taxes again which raises the cost of living for everyone. In a way, keeping drugs illegal is a jobs program for law enforcement, the legal system and the prison system, paid for by our taxes. Its even a jobs program for the medical profession who are paid very well to patch up or put on a slab the victims of gang shootings over drugs. Again, hospitals are either fully or partially supported by tax dollars.

And how about the tens of thousands of people who are killed each year by people in the drug trade? Isn't this a lot more people than are killed by the use of drugs each year? Purely from a saving lives perspective, we would be better off legalizing it.

Jobs where the public safety is at stake could still require drug testing. Sure, drugs would then be legal but if people with certain jobs are tested positive for whatever, then they cannot have that job. That's how it is now anyways. Making drugs legal would not mean that airline pilots can now fly with traces of opiates or THC in their blood. In fact, most smart employers would require drug testing...as many do now.

And no, its not hypocritical to make drugs legal and yet require drug testing for employment. An employer has every right to know whose job performance might be affected by drugs. You can either get high or choose to have a good job...its a free country and your choice. I know I would not want someone working for me who is getting high on the weekends because the chance of it affecting their job performance when they get back to work on Monday is pretty high...pardon the pun.

The same goes for operating a motor vehicle. Get in a wreck or hurt or kill someone and its a mandatory drug test. If tested positive, that person is in big trouble. It would be no different than the penalties for drinking and driving. If you want to get high then you cant drive a vehicle. Sorry, but others lives are more important than ones desire to get high.

There is no perfect solution to the problem....just a better compromise. Its not a winnable war and I think the sooner we realize that then the sooner we can shut down the vast majority of the problems associated with big money being involved in the cost of drugs, the production and the transport of drugs. Additionally, we could stop the tens of billions of dollars we waste on unsuccessfully trying to shut down the trade....not to mention the tens of billions in other costs to society.

And yes, this post clearly relates to boats if you have ever had your boat busted into by a drug user or ever wished you could could visit a beautiful port but could not because of its drug trade related violence.

[J Ventura]

Back to the submarines , about 2 years ago the USN caught a submarine off Costa Rica , heading for California , and as I recall it it wasn't a backyard contraption, it was a "real" ocean going submarine. And about 5 years ago a submarine was intercepted in the Atlantic, some Colombians had just bought it from Russia ( or some entrepreneurial Russians...) complete with crew and all.

Originally Posted by maxingout

Another drug running scheme bites the dust. Good for the DEA.

The DEA is fighting a lost war

[PAR]

The DEA is fighting a fool's war, an inheareted war that can't be won at current levels of intrest, For 30 years now we've tossed, comparatively the same amount of money at the war as is generated by the drug loads. This isn't the way you win a war. This is the way you avoid a debate on the real subject, of which the logic has long since been well known, but political suicide if you stand on it's principle.

Then again how would the CIA, NSA and other government agencies gather up the funds to support research on new equipment and technologies (like multi million dollar spy planes) if they didn't have the resale of confiscated drugs to work with. You don't really think they actually spent 20 billion on the "war on drugs" do you? If we wanted to, we could destroy every single facility making the white stuff in a week, but this isn't economically sound for several other agencies who's funding is closely watched by congress.

As far as the sub, I'll bet it was sacrificed so the local drug lord can say he made and "offering" to the war gods, when they come calling for their latest "cut".

[GordMay]

Originally Posted by PAR

... This isn't the way you win a war. This is the way you avoid a debate on the real subject, of which the logic has long since been well known, but political suicide if you stand on it's principle...

Originally Posted by skipmac

... The biggest benefit to the war on drugs is to give politicians a popular drum to beat to get elected. Who is going to argue against get tough on crime/drugs position in an election campaign?

Only because we, the electorate, are ignorant idiots.

[David_Old_Jersey]

Originally Posted by skipmac

The biggest benefit to the war on drugs is to give politicians a popular drum to beat to get elected. Who is going to argue against get tough on crime/drugs position in an election campaign?

The biggest addicts in the illegal drugs business are............the forces of law & order. More money and jobs involved than in the illegal side! Not saying the failure of the drugs wars is deliberate, but for those in the business not exactly a disaster either.

I am not in favour of widespread legalisation (apart from maybe pot sold in pre-packaged ciggarette form), but would favour medicalising heroin (it's a substitute that works for most drug abusers - no matter their original drug(s) of choice ) - the manner of delivery may be open for debate, but IMO the only sensible option is to deliver quality controlled smack to those who you would otherwise have to spend much money on re-cycling through the criminal justice system.

Overall less dead (and cheaper), the cost will be some different ones to those who would otherwise have gone down that route. But you can't legislate against stupidity - on drugs as in other things.

"Heroin! - accept no substitutes!"

Scarey things to consider with illegal drugs is that a) most folks can afford their choices (at least in cash terms) - they ain't all robbing yer TV etc b) can function within the workplace c) move on with their lives before joining the cast of The Wire

Will there be change in my lifetime? I don't think overtly - but the Medicalising is happening in Europe.........

[Blue Stocking]

Hope I am not straying too far from subject.
From a DUI or DWI angle, which uses the breathaliser, how do the police determine DWH (driving while high). This is a serious query, not a mischevious one.