Posted on 01/22/2015 12:26:19 AM PST by SWAMPSNIPER
Then I’ll ask. When and where did you live that currently illegal drugs are or we’re legal?
It’s a simple question. Answer it.
L
No it isn't. It is everyone who has to support this person because he became infected with this disease. It is everyone who has to depend on this person for their own welfare. The user is also a victim of the person who infected him with the disease.
That is the problem with Libertarian thinking, the scope is too small. They try to disconnect causality.
I would suspect that the drone was downed by American border patrol agents using electronic means
They did the deed in Mexican airspace covertly
It’s a simple question. Answer it.
It is a deliberate and childish distortion of the point.
Not having a war on drugs makes drugs available. THAT IS THE POINT. That is the primary consequence of not having a war on drugs. Now you two come along and want to play your word games with the point, and i'm not going to indulge your childishness.
Why don't you look at what NathanBedford writes? *THAT* is how to debate in a non-childish fashion.
“It is everyone who has to support this person because he became infected with this disease”
People make a choice to support them as I said. No one “has” to do it. I learned this the hard way. Simply say “you’re on your own” and do it. No food, no housing, no succor of any kind.
People make a choice to use this crap and the people around them make a choice, consciously or not, to actively aid and abet this behavior. Those who do so are more deserving of scorn than pity.
Now, where and when did you live that these substances were legal?
Simple question. Answer it.
L
“It is a deliberate and childish distortion of the point.”
No, it isn’t. Where and when please.
“Not having a war on drugs makes them available.”
Hey genius, this crap is available now in spite of your utterly failed approach. About that there is no rational debate. The crap is available in greater quantity than ever. Criminalization of these substances has turned entire countries into narco-states. It’s caused a civil war in Mexico and all of that blood is on the hands of folks like you.
Meth labs bloom like poppies in rural America thanks to short sighted policies you support. If it were produced by legitimate pharmaceutical companies there wouldn’t be any of them. Drug gangs the world over would,have to find another line of work. They’re in business because of people like you. They’re yours lock, stock, barrel, and every dead kid who’s caught a bullet in a gang drug turf war.
You’re causing more harm than good and you’re to blind or obstinate to see it. But you don’t care. Your cause is just and it’s “for the children”.
Right?
L
And where is this fantasy land in which your statement is true? Here in reality-ville no such thing can happen.
Simple question. Answer it.
No, it is a deliberate effort to play word games with a straightforward point; That I have lived where drugs were available, conditions which would be the CONSEQUENCE of not having a war on drugs. You are just attempting to force your preferred interpretation of my words rather than my own meaning, and i'll not accommodate you. You are trying to make the point about awkward phrasing rather than about the fact drug availability produces great harm to innocent people.
Obfuscation rather than clarity would seem to be your effort here.
It is, and you can go F**K yourself.
Hey genius, this crap is available now in spite of your utterly failed approach. About that there is no rational debate. The crap is available in greater quantity than ever. Says who? You people who have been screaming to legalize drugs forever? Yeah, we're not going to pay much attention to your faked up statistics.
This stuff ebbs and flows, and you chicken littles will take every falling acorn , and attempt to make it into "Global Warming" or something. Nations live for Centuries, not Decades, and your ideas are the childish byproduct of short lived children who do not know any better because you've never lived under any other conditions.
You are the social version of the "Grass is always greener on the other side of the fence." When in fact the grass is horrible and deadly on that side of the fence, but you have been painted a Pollyanna picture of a world you've never experienced yourself, by people who are just as ignorant about such conditions as are you.
If it were produced by legitimate pharmaceutical companies there wouldn’t be any of them.
You are right, because they would wipe out all of the competition and supply the product themselves. They would also devote their research labs to making it more addictive. We would have the modern equivalent of the British East India company shipping in narcotics by the kiloton.
“And where is this fantasy land in which your statement is true? Here in reality-ville no such thing can happen.”
It happened in my home. It wasn’t easy, but we did it. That person ceased to be a part of our lives until he got and stayed clean. Funny thing tho, saying “no” to the constant demands for sympathy and aid got easier instead of more difficult.
He also knows that a single “relapse” will result in the same circumstances. Instant “you are gone and this time for good.”.
The fact that you’re too weak to do it does not mean that everyone else is.
L
No, you misunderstand the point. You and your family can do whatever, but here in the USA the government will FORCE YOU to pay for indigents and indolents. You don't get to vote "no."
The fact that you’re too weak to do it does not mean that everyone else is.
No one in my family is on drugs, or has ever attempted to use them. Again, my point was never about familial support, it is about forced government mandated support. Your idea to just let them starve is unrealistic when the government forces you to pay for them anyway.
“It is, and you can go F**K yourself”
Do you kiss your mother with that mouth?
No one points a gun at people to force them to put this stuff into their bodies, British East India Company notwithstanding. You’d rather have the Crips, The Bloods, and the Sinola Cartel running things. At least your honest about who’s side your on. I’ll give you that much.
Like I said, every headless honest Mexican cop belongs to your side. Every innocent kid gunned down by a drug gang thug belongs to your side. Your side paid for every single gold plated AK-47 south of the border.
By your own admission the drug trade “ebbs and flows”. It’ll never be gone no matter how draconian the penalties are. Mankind has been altering consciousness since the dawn of recorded history. Your not going to change that with guns, laws, and prison cells. Ever.
They can’t keep drugs out of prisons, Skippy. Let that roll around your half empty head for a few minutes. Your methods taken to their logical conclusion will be to turn the entire nation into a giant prison and they STILL won’t be able to keep the drugs out. But we will all get three hots and a cot. Small price to pay, though. That whole Liberty thing is over rated anyway.
I believe from our previous conversation on this subject that Singapore is your Police State of choice. Move there forthwith and enjoy the benefits. How’s the visa application process going?
L
No, they seduce them by telling them "it's fun" and "you'll like it." That there is a high probability that they will get hooked and addicted and turn into a living zombie doesn't get brought up.
I knew a pimp. He told me how he picked up young girls and turned them into whores. He would walk down the street (He spent a lot of time on the street) until he found a pretty young girl and then he would strike up a conversation (he was very charming) and eventually offer them some weed. He would get them smoking some weed, then he would mix some crack in it without them knowing. In a week, he had them turning tricks on the street to feed their newly acquired crack habit.
British East India Company notwithstanding. You’d rather have the Crips, The Bloods, and the Sinola Cartel running things.
Not at all. I would rather have them turned into ghosts, but we don't want to fight this war in the manner it ought to be fought. There should be a death sentence attached to the entire distribution system of drugs. There should be military incursions into any nation that allows or tolerates the production or trans-shipment of drugs from their territory.
You see, I also grasp the concept of supply and demand, and when you make the price to dear, the demand will fall.
By your own admission the drug trade “ebbs and flows”. It’ll never be gone no matter how draconian the penalties are.
That is a fact not in evidence. The Recidivism rate in Singapore is zero. Their drug rate is one tenth of ours. They don't have the power to do better than that, but we could take this war to the source rather than tolerating this ongoing attrition.
At least your honest about who’s side your on. I’ll give you that much.
And you are once again trying to misstate my position and put words in my mouth. You deliberately equate the idea of banning drugs with support for a vicious murdering cartel. This is a tactic known as the fallacy of false choice, but as I have pointed out, there is another choice. We wipe them out. Unfortunately we don't currently have the will to do so, but that will eventually come if we get enough bloodshed.
“No, you misunderstand the point. You and your family can do whatever, but here in the USA the government will FORCE YOU to pay for indigents and indolents. You don’t get to vote “no.”
So end that practice. And I do get a vote on it. Governor Walker is doing it in Wisconsin right now. Mississippi did it last year and it has survived court challenges. You simply lack the will. Your lack of backbone is the problem.
Let addicts root through garbage cans for all I care. If they commit crimes while doing so incarcerate them for that. Treat all cases of public intoxication like the nuisances they are. Let private charities funded by private donations aid however they wish. But stop forcing me at gunpoint to pay for your stupid, failed, and harmful policies.
You’re not helping. You’re making things worse. You’re exactly the sort of morally shriveled soul C S Lewis warned about almost a century ago. You are quite literally killing innocent people. And what’s worse you’re proud of it.
L
It's FEDERAL. You aren't going to end it short of taking over congress by massive and veto-proof majorities, by people who are intent on dismantling the welfare state.
Don't see that happening, do you?
You’re not helping. You’re making things worse. You’re exactly the sort of morally shriveled soul C S Lewis warned about almost a century ago. You are quite literally killing innocent people. And what’s worse you’re proud of it.
That you say stuff like this informs me that you don't grasp my point. You are on a mantra, like a Hare Krishna, and you haven't yet reached the point where you actually understand what I have said.
You firmly believe that allowing unfettered drug usage is going to reduce usage and death, and *THAT* is nonsensical based on past historical experience. Allowing unfettered access to drugs will end up killing a hundred million people or so if it follows the path of China, and given that drug addiction is a function of human biochemistry, it is pretty d@mn certain to follow the same path that China followed.
And you are accusing me of making things worse? My friend, you don't know what "Worse" is. You really don't.
“You aren’t going to end it short of taking over congress by massive and veto-proof majorities, by people who are intent on dismantling the welfare state.”
Well we better get busy then. Too bad you’ll be in Singapore. I’ll bet even you could be useful. Somehow. Maybe. Stranger things have happened. I’m not sure where but I’m sure they’ve happened. Don’t ask me to prove it.
Perhaps you should trot on over to the FR Homepage and read the mission statement. It’s pretty much the purpose of this forum to do just that.
“and you haven’t yet reached the point where you actually understand what I have said.”
Ah, yes. The old “you’re just not bright enough to understand me” angle. This one comes straight out of the Liberal Playbooks right after “do it for the children”. Us rubes out here can’t possibly think all on their own. Best to just pass a law and tell everyone who questions things that their too stupid to understand that it’s for their own good. How’s that Obama school lunch taste today?
“You firmly believe that allowing unfettered drug usage is going to reduce usage and death”
I never said “unfettered”. Anyone over 21, just like alcohol. That’s hardly and “unfettered” market.
“Allowing unfettered access to drugs will end up killing a hundred million people”
Who let Captain Hyperbole in here?
And to be brutally honest about it if there are 100 million people stupid enough to do this to themselves then we’d be better off without them. Let them poison themselves and in 6 months the rest of us can run some end loaders down the street, drop the corpses in mass graves, and then get on with our lives without being forced at gunpoint to babysit them.
“My friend”
I ain’t your friend. Just clearing that up.
L
Flippant unrealistic answer, and much like your thinking on the issue.
Ah, yes. The old “you’re just not bright enough to understand me” angle. This one comes straight out of the Liberal Playbooks right after “do it for the children”. Us rubes out here can’t possibly think all on their own. Best to just pass a law and tell everyone who questions things that their too stupid to understand that it’s for their own good. How’s that Obama school lunch taste today?
Nothing in your childish remarks conveys any sign that you grasp the nature of the problem. At this point, I will have to stand by the "you don't know what the f*** you are talking about."
At least NathanBedford has offered an argument, albeit based on an erroneous assumption, but all you do is say that you know better than history.
I never said “unfettered”. Anyone over 21, just like alcohol. That’s hardly and “unfettered” market.
Yeah, what sort of "fetters" are you going to put on Opium? I dare say if anyone tried, you and your Libertarian posse would be screaming bloody murder at this assault against your "freedom."
Who let Captain Hyperbole in here?
You think it's hyperbole. More proof that you are simply out of your league in understanding the nature of the problem. Yes, more than 100 million Chinese died as a result of legalized drugs in China.
And to be brutally honest about it if there are 100 million people stupid enough to do this to themselves then we’d be better off without them. Let them poison themselves and in 6 months the rest of us can run some end loaders down the street, drop the corpses in mass graves, and then get on with our lives without being forced at gunpoint to babysit them.
And this is another example of your astonishing level of ignorance about larger human social dynamics. Just how many citizens do you think a nation can afford to lose before it impacts national security? No nation on earth can afford to let a significant portion of it's population commit suicide, and none would.
It doesn't matter what the cause, no nation would willingly allow massive losses of citizens. The primary function of government is to survive and protect it's people.
“Nothing in your childish remarks conveys any sign that you grasp the nature of the problem. “
Right back to “you’re just not smart enough to understand me” line. Like I said, straight out of the liberal play book. We are all just a herd of dumb ass sheep who are gosh darned lucky there are clever chaps like you in charge. Can’t have the sheep thinking for themselves. That simply won’t do.
“Yeah, what sort of “fetters” are you going to put on Opium?”
Available to anyone over the age of 21 with product purity according to USP standards. Product labeling to indicate same. That’s all the “fetters” adults need. Anyone caught giving it to anyone under 21 does 20 years for a first offense. Second offense is life without parole. That fettered enough for you?
“Yes, more than 100 million Chinese died as a result of legalized drugs in China”
Bullshit. Mao himself only managed 20 to 30 million.
No where near that many Americans would partake if legalization happened. Your pulling numbers out of your backside.
“Flippant unrealistic answer”
Wuss. No guts for the real fight.
Do enjoy your time in Singapore. Can’t help but point out that they still have drug users there in spite of the death penalty.
When the next 8 year old catches a stray bullet fired by a drug gang I will be sure to post the story here and ping you to it. Perhaps you can visit the family and explain how their kid is just some unfortunate collateral damage in your never ending war on human nature.
Oh well. You have to break a few eggs to make an omelette. Right?
Note to readers: according to DiogenesLamp, to say that for the first 150 or so years of U.S. history there were no laws against drugs is a "lie" although he states it's factually correct.
And draconian penalties work considerably less well for Indonesia and Saudi Arabia. I don't like those odds.
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.