Indeed, the US would be much better off if it were more like China! screw that due process crap - the money would be better spent on facial recognition systems and GPS systems to protect good citizens from terrorists. and everyone knows if someone is accused, they're guilty anyway. how about beating the Chinese at their own game? throw a good beating to all the other societal leeches - obviously the real troublemakers have to go - people that protest the government, read naughty books, practice heathen religions - take 'em out first, to get the other criminals' attention. thankfully Mr. Ashcroft has begun the process in earnest. then move on to all those bastards that insist on committing crimes that good citizens know are so easy to avoid - like people claiming bankruptcy - they spent the money, why should everyone else pay? maybe cut off their hands so they can never write a bad check again. and those unwed welfare mothers? they should know how to control themselves instead of producing more burdens for the good citizens to feed - throw them into chain gangs and learn 'em the value of a good day's work, for sure. jaywalkers - those bastards voluntarily slow down traffic, wasting gas, and we know that funds terrorism - lock 'em up. think of how many lives could have been saved on 9/11 if every jaywalker were rotting in a supermax. the possibilities are endless! the more you kill, the more you save! and the best part is that good citizens don't have to even lift a finger - they can just pay some immigrants to do the killing instead! {note: sarcasm}
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Quote from Magna: Does executing drug dealers include the biggest dealers, like those peddling nicotine and alcohol, or only the (currently) illegal drugs that aren't regulated and taxed? -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Quote from Magna: I forgot, how many people are killed by cigarettes each year, somewhere higher than a quarter million. Isn't that death and destruction, some might even suggest murder.... -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Magna - well said. I couldn't agree more. The anti-drug argument is based on the mis-information that the tobacco lobbies, booze lobbies, and racists have foisted upon us. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Quote from hapaboy: Magna, I definitely agree that an argument can definitely be made that nicotine and alcohol cause death and destruction. However, smokers and drinkers are not generally running around burglarizing our homes, killing kids, and committing umpteen crimes so they can buy a pack of Marlboros or a six-pack. I don't think your heaviest smoker or drinker is spending $1,000 a week to feed their habit. Drunk driving sickens me and I'm definitely for much harsher penalties. You read all the time about drunk drivers who have been arrested umpteen times and then they finally go out and cause a crash that leaves their victims dead while the drunk driver walks away with a scratch or two. Just insane. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hapaboy, whenever I watch "cops" all I see is drunken car chases, or convenience store robberies where somebody walked off with cash, booze, and cigarettes. And what goes on in prisons in exchange for those same cigarettes? Most drug dealers don't target children (if for no other reason than kids lack the money to buy drugs) yet cigarette companies do. Most violent criminals regularly use cigarettes and alcohol. Look at militias and pro-white racist organizations in the US. They hate drugs, yet they think that drinking and smoking are absolutely OK. How many drunk idiots do you see fighting in bars?? Granted, I have a very liberal bias towards everything, but most people who make the anti-drug argument don't seem to have the facts entirely straight. I'd wager any amount of money that 98% of all violent crimes in the US are committed by people who regularly smoke cigarettes and drink alcohol -- but are cigarettes and alcohol illegal? Is there any connection between cigarettes, alcohol, and committing violent crimes? Sure. Most violent criminals are also smokers. If there was EVER a gateway drug, it's either nicotine or alcohol. I'd also wager any sum that most guys who beat their wives are drunks, and not stoners. Yet everyone acts like pot smokers are a problem in society and drunks are not. Nobody ever lights up a J and beats their wife, yet the alcohol lobbies spew out this propaganda that pot smoking teenagers are supporting terror. How many friends did you have in college who were raped or attacked by some worthless, drunk, frat thug? This is the same thug who wears *nice* abercrombie clothes, goes to church, and thinks that pot is bad for you. Alcohol is one of the biggest problems in our society, yet it is legal and drugs are not. How many friends did you have in college that were raped by a stoned hippie?? The images of alcohol and pot that most Americans have in their heads are just soooooooooooo totally f^cked up that it blows my MIND. Most Americans would think that the Netherlands are a land of lawlessness, when the opposite is true. They hardly have any violent crime. Why? Not because of easy-to-get drugs, but because of NO guns. It's pathetic that the alcohol lobby has done such a thorough job of making sure that their poison is the only poison that is legal, while OUR TAX DOLLARS are being pissed away fighting victimless crimes. I don't think that addictive drugs should be legal (hmm...alcohol is an addictive drug, yet it is LEGAL) but I do have a problem with burning cash fighting crimes that don't cause any harm to society. Frankly, I'd much rather have the typical drunk stay at home getting stoned, ordering pizza and watching TV, than have him drive out to a bar, get drunk, and then run someone over on his way home from the bar. In my opinion, this is clearly a perception issue. Too many Americans are brainwashed into thinking that getting drunk and shooting guns are A-OK, and scapegoat everything else for it. How much do you think the cigarette companies make from prisons every year? These are the same companies that spend money on anti-drug commercials, which they then get to deduct from their income. So drugs stay demonized and illegal. People get locked up for drugs and spend 5 years in jail smoking cigarettes. Perfect.
I was wondering when you'd jump in from the peanut gallery and try to turn this into a nonsensical rant against Ashcroft. If you want to discuss this reasonably, go ahead. If not, just vote "no" on the poll and shut up. {note: not being sarcastic}
We could put drug dealers out of business by legalizing certain drugs such as pot and coke. These used to be legal in America and somehow we did not become a nation of junkies.
In the US we have legal drugs that are just as bad as the illegal ones. We all know how well prohibition worked. Cigarettes kill more people than any other drug and it is still legal. Our government is really stupid on this issue. I would not partake of drugs even if they are legal. I never smoked and would not consider it as it is a huge health risk. My uncle died of lung cancer when I was a kid. I also would not take heroin unless a doctor gave it to me for the pain of dying. People risk their health all the time for things they think might make them FEEL better. Their mother did not teach them any better I suppose? My mom said if I took drugs, she would kill me!
Bung, good post. I agree with you on several points. You're right about alcohol being involved in rapes, spousal abuse, drunk driving, etc. (As far as bar fights, I could care less about a couple of schmos with too many Buds in 'em duking it out over the ho on the stool.) I also agree that marijuana appears to be less involved in those kinds of crimes. Perhaps a distinction needs to be made between marijuana and "hard" drugs like crack, cocaine, LSD, heroin, ice, etc. Surely you cannot say such hard drugs do not do harm to society! I don't agree with your smokers argument though. That many criminals smoke doesn't convince me that eliminating smoking will lower crime in some way. People, criminals and non-criminals, smoke because they're addicted. I don't believe there are any other studies out there that will confirm that smoking leads to violence like crack does. And drug dealers do target kids. I don't know where you get the impression that they don't. Are we living in the same country? So I agree with you that alcohol abuse is a problem. I do not agree with your overall assessment though that drugs and the accompanying crime associated with drugs is overexaggerated, unless you restrict your argument to pot. Your views on alcohol notwithstanding, what then is your stance on "hard" drug dealers and pushers? I think I know already, but please reply.
"shut up"? reasonable indeed. you've no more right to dictate who speaks and what they say than anyone else here. you are advocating killing people for selling a plant, or rather, advocating paying someone else to kill on your behalf, and then you call other people unreasonable? one imagines that between this and your calls for bombing iraq and torturing people, you must be a hell of a tough guy. have you done a lot of killing, yourself? ever been to prison? ever condemned someone to death? or are you just prattling on based on hollywood nonsense and newspaper propaganda?
You just love to rant.... You're correct - I have no right to dicate, but I can at least ask for confining the discussion to the topic at hand. As far as advocating killing people for selling a plant, if you've bothered to read the posts you'll note I'm suggesting a differentiation between "hard" drugs and marijuana - if that is your point. Just like you to drag in other threads. Yes I do support the war on Iraq and torturing human filth like Khalid Mohammed in order to get information to save American lives. But I'm not going to drag those points into this thread.