Posted on 12/18/2014 12:53:01 PM PST by Thistooshallpass9
My idea of dealing with criminals is to take profits out of their pockets - perhaps you prefer that they remain well funded.
Singapore routinely executes anyone caught with drugs, and this policy has worked out pretty well for them.
You can continue your love affair with the far left - I prefer the system of limited government established by our Founding Fathers.
We did not take profits away from criminals, we made them respectable.
Some were driven out of the alcohol market and some went legit - sounds like a win either way.
Spreads like a disease doesn't it? Just slower. It is a very slow spreading disease.
Wonder what percent is suicide?
But we are still having murders. Is that a failure or a success? By the standards the dopers want to use, the war on murder is a total and complete failure, and we should just stop fighting against murder because people are going to do it anyway.
Is it the fact that I checked the excerpt button that is violating something? I wish to abide by all guidelines, and I’m here mostly to share articles with this community, and to hear feedback about them from this mostly conservative crowd.... In the future, I can just post the best 300 words, and say it’s not an excerpt, if that is what you are suggesting. Would that be more gentlemanly?
Rum runners!
But we are still having murders. Is that a failure or a success?
It's orders of magnitude closer to success than drug criminalization - and laws against murder don't put billions of dollars in profits in criminal hands.
Some were driven out of the alcohol market and some went legit - sounds like a win either way.
___________________________________________________
The ones who were driven out? The mobsters? They're still here and worse than ever.
Mexican Cartels. Running a trillion dollar industry.
So how is this a "win" in your book?
This all worked more or less to a certain degree without too much friction until the non-commenting, short-excerpting, long-complaining blog pimp was born.
I have no complaint if a good conservative blogger posts his own material to FR, not as an excerpt to drive hits and discussion back to his blog, but rather to impart useful information to OUR readers and to promote and join in on the discussion and conservative activism HERE on FR.
If a blogger can’t or refuses do that, and if he constantly complains or fights with our participants over it, then I’d just as soon he doesn’t post here. It’s not my job to make his content or his presentation or cooperation acceptable to our readers. That’s his job. And if he cannot do it or refuses to do it and continues posting brief excerpts only and obviously attempting to draw away our participants while loudly complaining about it, then I have no sympathy for his complaints and the more apt I am to ban his account and blog."
Posting the full content would accomplish that nicely.
Unless, of course, your goal is to drive traffic to your blog.
Post the entire article.
But not making big mooney in the alcohol market - that's a win in any sane person's book.
I am not making your case. I'm pointing out your argument is based on a flawed assumption; That success must be defined by the elimination or constant reduction of the crime.
That is a nonsensical and unrealistic claim, and it demonstrates a lack of understanding of the nature of crime, or even the nature of humans.
We *ALWAYS* have a section of the populace which will insist on committing crimes. The numbers go up, the numbers go down, but the percentages stay roughly the same.
Setting as a goal the elimination or constant reduction of crime is just unrealistic, but what is by far worse is arguing that a momentary bump in statistics proves a very successful methodology has failed.
Again, Murder goes up and murder goes down, but it will never go away all together. Your argument is tantamount to legalizing murder because the rate goes up occasionally.
Nonsense.
300 words?
Oh, you ill-councilled, you poorly advised...
Count the words.. you can post many hundreds of words
of your own making, as goofy as you like and without
trying to score some gelt from Free Republic...
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/3236857/posts
OK, go for it then.
My idea of dealing with drug dealers is to take the life out of their bodies. That's what they do to others, so it just seems fair to me.
Singapore has the right idea.
Would you prefer the drug cartels be given license to operate freely in the USA? To distribute thei product, to pay taxes, and be considered another well respected American corporation?
I can it now - Sinaloa Brothers sponsoring sporting events and the Knights Templar advertising on TV.
bump
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.