Posted on 02/10/2003 7:49:25 AM PST by rs79bm
Benjamin Curtis, the 22-year old actor who portrays the Dell Guy in those bothersome computer commercials, was arrested late last night (2/9) on a marijuana possession charge, The Smoking Gun has learned. According to cops, Curtis was holding a "small bag of marijuana" when he was popped on Manhattan's Lower East Side (at Ludlow and Rivington for you Gothamites). Curtis is currently being held in Central Booking and is scheduled to be arraigned later today in Manhattan Criminal Court. Curtis, who lives in lower Manhattan, was charged with criminal possession of marijuana, a misdemeanor. Bonnie Shumofsky, the actor's agent, said she was unaware of her client's bust when contacted this morning by TSG. (1 page)
Abortion violates a person's rights; drug use does not.
The fact is that it is because of freedom that drugs are illegal. If the majority of the voters wanted to legalize drugs, it would happen.
"Freedom" does not mean tyranny of the majority; in fact, the Founding Fathers understood that those concepts were in opposition.
Because both you know and I know that it was a dumb question and does not add to accomplishing your desire to make smoking dope legal.
Except that never happened. You can not "shoot down" an argument with relevatism. But if you feel happier to think so, more power to you. The attempted logic in the "shooting down" explains why the LP never gets more than 1/2 of 1% of the vote. You can not accept the FACT that alcohol has an ingrained cultural basis.
"So what? Who cares? Why is tobacco legal when setting yourself on fire in front of the UN is not? "
Please try to use perspective.
Not really...abortion is a poor comparison. This is due to the fact that abortion is harming another individual, the unborn baby (life begins at conception). That's why abortion should be illegal, except in the case of the mother's life being in danger (my opinion). That's a very hard call to make, seeing as how one has experienced life and one hasn't yet, but when it comes to the mother's life (not inconvienence, but a 'you're gonna die' scenario) the mother should make the call. As for the "pro-choice" crowd or the pro-murder crowd, rather, they need to realize that the point is when you decide to have sex or not, not the vacuuming out of a fetus which will in a few months be a beautiful human being.
The fact is that it is because of freedom that drugs are illegal. If the majority of the voters wanted to legalize drugs, it would happen. But I do recall a few ballot initiatives carshing and burning recently.
Whoa...now you're combining two incompatible things!!! Democracy (rule of the majority) with freedom. With rule of the majority, there cannot be freedom. What if the majority votes to have your property confiscated and redistributed to those who voted? Oops! That is happening today anyway! Sorry, but I believe in the rule of law based on the freedom of choice as long as your choices don't harm another person.
Someone smoking pot in their house on a Friday night then crashing in their bad doesn't harm me, but someone voting Republican or Democrat which in turn increases federal spending and taking more of my money does harm me.
Don't tell me what I know. Your excuses were BS.
Ok I agree, it was prsumptious for me to assume you knew that it was a dumb question. I knew it though.
Except that never happened.
Oh, but it did. You offered "I have never seen drugs do good for anyone" as a reason to ban them; I pointed out that your 'logic' (to use the term loosely) also supported a Cheetos ban.
You can not accept the FACT that alcohol has an ingrained cultural basis.
That's a different argument---and I accept the fact, just not its being a sound basis for legislation.
The "republic" is what I agree with - not total democracy. But still - with representation, you will still basically have the will of the majority. When WJ Bryan was able to get the amendment passed to have Senators directly elected, that was another nail in the coffin of the republic.
And yes, we are far away from the Republic (but that is a different thread).
RIP the United States of America as a Republic, 1787-1861.
And I agree. The point is that the WOD is an absolute joke. All the LEOs I know, and I know more than a few, will admit to this, at least in private anyway. We throw away billions to other coutries that most hate our guts, and blow or tax money. If an American has a problem with drugs, he should be offered help if they want it. Throwing our own people in cages for this is absolutely moronic.
Except that has no base in reality. If you could make a case for people becoming addicted to Cheetos, crashing cars under the influence of them, and generally dedicating their lives to maintain a Cheetos supply, it would be relevant.
And I will say again that I have never seen drugs do good for anyone. Ruined lives and broken marriages.
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.