- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: John Kelly brings truth to the table for all to see.. more deaths than 12 years of Vietnam
Posted on 4/19/17 at 11:44 am to FooManChoo
Posted on 4/19/17 at 11:44 am to FooManChoo
quote:
What it boils down to is an argument that it sucks for people who currently break the law to have to suffer the consequences of breaking the law. It completely disregards personal responsibility.
we are saying the law, as is written and applied, is stupid, irrational, and creates more problems that society has to deal with
2
Posted on 4/19/17 at 11:45 am to Paluka
quote:
When you speak of what needs to be changed what is your opinion on this?
Hopefully my earlier post addressed this.
Posted on 4/19/17 at 11:48 am to Duke
I agree that something needs to be done about the war on drugs, whether that is decriminalization or stricter penalties or cracking down on cartels. I don't think the argument that it sucks for the people who break the law is a good argument to make in favor of decriminalization, though, as it puts the blame on the law or the government and not on the criminals for the situation that the criminals find themselves in; as I've said multiple times now, it denies personal responsibility, making the criminals into victims.
Posted on 4/19/17 at 11:49 am to MSMHater
quote:
When, and why, did we start locking people up for their use?
When did we create a system that requires my tax dollars to fix you getting your fix?
Posted on 4/19/17 at 11:50 am to FooManChoo
quote:
I don't think the argument that it sucks for the people who break the law is a good argument to make in favor of decriminalization
what about irrationality, ineffectiveness, and dis-proportionality is not an effective rhetoric, in your opinion?
what do you use to justify criticism of a law?
quote:
as it puts the blame on the law or the government and not on the criminals for the situation that the criminals find themselves in
well the government is the only body who can create stupid, irrational laws so they should get the blame for their behavior
Posted on 4/19/17 at 11:51 am to montanagator
quote:
Start handing Life without Parole to doctors and pharmacists and maybe it will actually work as a deterrent to handing out opiods like they're candy.
It's not super effective in fighting illegal drugs but a doctor has a hell of a lot more to lose than the average gangbanger.
Already addressed in this thread. Those deaths are actually lower than 2011.
So that's not the increase.
Posted on 4/19/17 at 11:51 am to MButterfly
quote:
When did we create a system that requires my tax dollars to fix you getting your fix?
well the current policy that attempts this was enacted in the 70s, iirc
the whole point of the WOD is to "fix you getting your fix"
Posted on 4/19/17 at 11:52 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:Maybe so, but to deny the culpability of the law-breakers is not a good tactic.
we are saying the law, as is written and applied, is stupid, irrational, and creates more problems that society has to deal with
Change the law because it is unjust or because marijuana has not proven to be harmful or because society is not worse off having it legal than with it illegal, but making an argument that criminals are penalized for breaking the law is not constructive, in my opinion. That's the point of law enforcement, that enforcing laws typically creates hardships for the people who break the laws. That's why the law is meant to be a deterrent against certain actions, and that is a concept that isn't unique to drugs.
Posted on 4/19/17 at 11:53 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
we are saying the law, as is written and applied, is stupid, irrational, and creates more problems that society has to deal with
Yeah... but it doesn't.
You are advocating for a larger expense for your desire to do drugs.
You want to get serious about the issue, then you have to attack it from all directions.
Posted on 4/19/17 at 11:54 am to FooManChoo
quote:
Sorry but I always find this particular argument/statement to be lacking substance to me. Essentially that argument is that a law is bad because breaking the law leads to ruined lives for the lawbreakers.
Youre missing the point.. The laws disproportionately ruin the lives of the poor and uneducated.. Ive seen first hand how those with money can work their way through the system while those without are caught in the system forever..
I dont have to excuse the actual crime to see the evidence on how this affects people on different levels.
Posted on 4/19/17 at 11:54 am to MButterfly
So we're going to blame the Cartels (rightfully so) and completely overlook how most people get started on heroin which is with prescription painkillers. Unreal the profits these companies make and the unethical and damn near illegal methods they use to convince doctors to keep prescribing more and more.
Posted on 4/19/17 at 11:55 am to FooManChoo
quote:
I don't think the argument that it sucks for the people who break the law is a good argument to make in favor of decriminalization
Wha?
It's a piece of the cost of enforcement side of the argument.
quote:
as it puts the blame on the law or the government and not on the criminals for the situation that the criminals find themselves in
The blame is on the government for enacting and enforcing laws that aren't worth the costs. It is the reason I'm talking about changing the laws. The whole "personal responsibility" part is outside the scope here. It's a magnitude of consequence problem, not that there are currently consequences.
This post was edited on 4/19/17 at 11:58 am
Posted on 4/19/17 at 11:57 am to FooManChoo
quote:
Maybe so, but to deny the culpability of the law-breakers is not a good tactic.
i don't think their behavior should be a crime, so in that paradigm, what "culpability" is left?
i am not advocating for retroactively expunging the records of these people or rescinding their convictions, which is what you seem to be implying that i'm arguing
quote:
but making an argument that criminals are penalized for breaking the law is not constructive, in my opinion.
the penalties are way too severe and show how irrational the entire system is
quote:
That's the point of law enforcement, that enforcing laws typically creates hardships for the people who break the laws.
yes and these laws and these punishments are irrational and create vastly disproportionate punishments. that means the laws are bad
Posted on 4/19/17 at 11:57 am to MButterfly
quote:
You are advocating for a larger expense for your desire to do drugs.
what expense?
and my desire to do drugs? the frick
Posted on 4/19/17 at 11:59 am to Duke
quote:
The blame is on the government for enacting and enforcing laws that aren't worth the costs. It is the reason I'm talking about changing the laws. The whole "personal responsibility" part is outside the scope here. It's a magnitude of consequence problem, not that there are currently consequences.
yeah i mean let's say the federal government puts alcohol in schedule one. possession of alcohol is a felony and distribution may get you actual jail time
reasonable policy?
Posted on 4/19/17 at 12:00 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
well the current policy that attempts this was enacted in the 70s, iirc
the whole point of the WOD is to "fix you getting your fix"
Let me restate that. You are advocating that we stop locking up criminals who are aware that if they break the law they could end up in jail for a long time. Instead, you want to create a network of rehabs and treatment centers and use the source of the lock up dollars as a source to fund the rehabs.
That network will cost FAR more than the current method of locking them up.
At this point we have 1 options that your side is advocating for.
1- When did we start locking people up for use... With this... if you are not locking them up, and want the laws relaxed...... then die in the damn streets, because it was your choice and you should not get my tax dollars because of your bad choice.
Posted on 4/19/17 at 12:01 pm to MButterfly
Every year more than 37k Americans are killed in car accidents. The trend had been going down but vehicle related deaths increased in 2016.
Global road safety web site
quote:
Annual United States Road Crash Statistics Over 37,000 people die in road crashes each year An additional 2.35 million are injured or disabled Over 1,600 children under 15 years of age die each year Nearly 8,000 people are killed in crashes involving drivers ages 16-20 Road crashes cost the U.S. $230.6 billion per year, or an average of $820 per person Road crashes are the single greatest annual cause of death of healthy U.S. citizens traveling abroad
Global road safety web site
Posted on 4/19/17 at 12:02 pm to SlowFlowPro
Simple solutions here
A) legalize everything
B) Death penalty for driving while impaired
C) Life in prison for providing substances to children, no parole
D) Legalization does not mean your employer can't drug test you and fire you as a condition of employment
A) legalize everything
B) Death penalty for driving while impaired
C) Life in prison for providing substances to children, no parole
D) Legalization does not mean your employer can't drug test you and fire you as a condition of employment
Posted on 4/19/17 at 12:03 pm to MButterfly
quote:
You are advocating that we stop locking up criminals who are aware that if they break the law they could end up in jail for a long time.
well if it's not illegal, then they're not breaking a law
why would i ever want to jail people who aren't breaking the law?
quote:
you want to create a network of rehabs and treatment centers and use the source of the lock up dollars as a source to fund the rehabs.
please link me to this statement that i allegedly made in this thread
quote:
That network will cost FAR more than the current method of locking them up.
in this hypothetical strawman that you've created, you're making a huge assumption here. you're completely overlooking recidivism and long-term economic viability of drug addicts
it wouldn't take that much of a % of the users to change their behavior to shift the costs way in the direction of rehab for these reasons
Posted on 4/19/17 at 12:05 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
my desire
'Your' in the general sense.
Page 4 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News