Texas Leaders v. Obama
Comments
-
We need a new leader, but not from Texas. We saw how that went a few years ago.
-
Disagreeoregonblitzkrieg said:We need a new leader, but not from Texas. We saw how that went a few years ago.
-
Ron Paul is kind of an out there nutjob isn't he?MikeDamone said:
Disagreeoregonblitzkrieg said:We need a new leader, but not from Texas. We saw how that went a few years ago.
-
No.oregonblitzkrieg said:
Ron Paul is kind of an out there nutjob isn't he?MikeDamone said:
Disagreeoregonblitzkrieg said:We need a new leader, but not from Texas. We saw how that went a few years ago.
He is a threat to the establishment in DC, so he is portrayed as such. Sounds like you fell for it. -
Here are his most 'extreme' positions, at least according to one obviously biased website:
1. Eviscerate Entitlements: Believes that Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid are unconstitutional, and has compared the failure of federal courts to strike them down to the courts' failure to abolish slavery in the 19th century.
2. Lay Off Half His Cabinet: Wants to abolish half of all federal agencies, including the departments of Energy, Education, Agriculture, Commerce, Health and Human Services, Homeland Security, and Labor.
3. Enable State Extremism: Would let states set their own policies on abortion, gay marriage, prayer in school, and most other issues.
4. Protect Sexual Predators' Privacy: Voted against requiring operators of wi-fi networks who discover the transmission of child porn and other forms online sex predation to report it to the government.
5. Rescind the Bin Laden Raid: Instead of authorizing the Navy Seals to take him out, President Paul would have sought Pakistan's cooperation to arrest him.
6. Simplify the Census: The questions posed by the Census Bureau's annual American Community Survey, which collects demographics data such as age, race, and income, are "both ludicrous and insulting," Paul says.
7. Let the Oldest Profession Be: Paul wants to legalize prostitution at the federal level.
8. Legalize All Drugs: Including cocaine and heroin.
9. Keep Monopolies Intact: Opposes federal antitrust legislation, calling it "much more harmful than helpful." Thinks that monopolies can be controlled by protecting "the concept of the voluntary contract."
10. Lay Off Ben Bernanke: Would abolish the Federal Reserve and revert to use of currencies that are backed by hard assets such as gold.
11. Stop Policing the Environment: Believes that climate change is no big deal and the Environmental Protection Agency is unnecessary. Most environmental problems can be addressed by enforcing private-property rights. Paul also thinks that interstate issues such as air pollution are best dealt with through compacts between states.
12. Not Do Anything, but Still...: Would not have voted for the Civil Rights Act of 1964 because it was a "massive violation of private property and contract, which are the bedrocks of a free society."
13. Let Markets Care for the Disabled: "The ADA should have never been passed," Paul says. The treatment of the handicapped should be determined by the free market.
14. First, Do Harm: Wants to end birthright citizenship. Believes that emergency rooms should have the right to turn away illegal immigrants.
15. Diss Mother Teresa: Voted against giving her the Congressional Gold Medal. Has argued that the medal, which costs $30,000, is too expensive.
But if true:
1. Completely ludicrous.
2. Some of this should happen, but not all.
3. Excellent idea.
4. Agree. I don't like these people but privacy from the government trumps that.
5. Completely naïve and idiotic.
6. Who cares.
7. Completely retarded.
8. Even more retarded.
9. Fucking Door, Ass, Out stupid.
10. Maybe.
11. Naïve.
12. Jackass. Would squander American power internationally.
13. Faggot ass position.
14. Yes
15. Yes
In short, looks like another menace to society.
-
Here are what is called his most "extreme positions".
1. Eviscerate Entitlements: Believes that Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid are unconstitutional, and has compared the failure of federal courts to strike them down to the courts' failure to abolish slavery in the 19th century.
2. Lay Off Half His Cabinet: Wants to abolish half of all federal agencies, including the departments of Energy, Education, Agriculture, Commerce, Health and Human Services, Homeland Security, and Labor.
3. Enable State Extremism: Would let states set their own policies on abortion, gay marriage, prayer in school, and most other issues.
4. Protect Sexual Predators' Privacy: Voted against requiring operators of wi-fi networks who discover the transmission of child porn and other forms online sex predation to report it to the government.
5. Rescind the Bin Laden Raid: Instead of authorizing the Navy Seals to take him out, President Paul would have sought Pakistan's cooperation to arrest him.
6. Simplify the Census: The questions posed by the Census Bureau's annual American Community Survey, which collects demographics data such as age, race, and income, are "both ludicrous and insulting," Paul says.
7. Let the Oldest Profession Be: Paul wants to legalize prostitution at the federal level.
8. Legalize All Drugs: Including cocaine and heroin.
9. Keep Monopolies Intact: Opposes federal antitrust legislation, calling it "much more harmful than helpful." Thinks that monopolies can be controlled by protecting "the concept of the voluntary contract."
10. Lay Off Ben Bernanke: Would abolish the Federal Reserve and revert to use of currencies that are backed by hard assets such as gold.
11. Stop Policing the Environment: Believes that climate change is no big deal and the Environmental Protection Agency is unnecessary. Most environmental problems can be addressed by enforcing private-property rights. Paul also thinks that interstate issues such as air pollution are best dealt with through compacts between states.
12. Not Do Anything, but Still...: Would not have voted for the Civil Rights Act of 1964 because it was a "massive violation of private property and contract, which are the bedrocks of a free society."
13. Let Markets Care for the Disabled: "The ADA should have never been passed," Paul says. The treatment of the handicapped should be determined by the free market.
14. First, Do Harm: Wants to end birthright citizenship. Believes that emergency rooms should have the right to turn away illegal immigrants.
15. Diss Mother Teresa: Voted against giving her the Congressional Gold Medal. Has argued that the medal, which costs $30,000, is too expensive.
Good Christ you are a fucking simpleton.oregonblitzkrieg said:Here are his most 'extreme' positions, at least according to one obviously biased website:
1. Eviscerate Entitlements: Believes that Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid are unconstitutional, and has compared the failure of federal courts to strike them down to the courts' failure to abolish slavery in the 19th century.
2. Lay Off Half His Cabinet: Wants to abolish half of all federal agencies, including the departments of Energy, Education, Agriculture, Commerce, Health and Human Services, Homeland Security, and Labor.
3. Enable State Extremism: Would let states set their own policies on abortion, gay marriage, prayer in school, and most other issues.
4. Protect Sexual Predators' Privacy: Voted against requiring operators of wi-fi networks who discover the transmission of child porn and other forms online sex predation to report it to the government.
5. Rescind the Bin Laden Raid: Instead of authorizing the Navy Seals to take him out, President Paul would have sought Pakistan's cooperation to arrest him.
6. Simplify the Census: The questions posed by the Census Bureau's annual American Community Survey, which collects demographics data such as age, race, and income, are "both ludicrous and insulting," Paul says.
7. Let the Oldest Profession Be: Paul wants to legalize prostitution at the federal level.
8. Legalize All Drugs: Including cocaine and heroin.
9. Keep Monopolies Intact: Opposes federal antitrust legislation, calling it "much more harmful than helpful." Thinks that monopolies can be controlled by protecting "the concept of the voluntary contract."
10. Lay Off Ben Bernanke: Would abolish the Federal Reserve and revert to use of currencies that are backed by hard assets such as gold.
11. Stop Policing the Environment: Believes that climate change is no big deal and the Environmental Protection Agency is unnecessary. Most environmental problems can be addressed by enforcing private-property rights. Paul also thinks that interstate issues such as air pollution are best dealt with through compacts between states.
12. Not Do Anything, but Still...: Would not have voted for the Civil Rights Act of 1964 because it was a "massive violation of private property and contract, which are the bedrocks of a free society."
13. Let Markets Care for the Disabled: "The ADA should have never been passed," Paul says. The treatment of the handicapped should be determined by the free market.
14. First, Do Harm: Wants to end birthright citizenship. Believes that emergency rooms should have the right to turn away illegal immigrants.
15. Diss Mother Teresa: Voted against giving her the Congressional Gold Medal. Has argued that the medal, which costs $30,000, is too expensive.
But if true:
1. Completely ludicrous.
He is right. These taxes are a tremendous unfair and unjust transfer of wealth from the young to the old.
2. Some of this should happen, but not all.
Agree
3. Excellent idea.
Agree
4. Agree. I don't like these people but privacy from the government trumps that.
Agree
5. Completely naïve and idiotic.
There is more to the story dailycaller.com/2011/05/12/ron-paul-says-he-would-not-have-ordered-bin-laden-kill/
6. Who cares.
People that care about privacy.
7. Completely retarded.
Why not let people buy and sell sex between consenting adults?
8. Even more retarded.
Educate yourself. At least a little bit.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLsCC0LZxkY
9. Fucking Door, Ass, Out stupid.
You don't understand how monopolies are created..clearly.
10. Maybe.
He is 100% correct. Again, I don't think you have a fucking clue about the Fed and whats going on. At least understand the basics of fiat currency.
11. Naïve.
Yes, you are.
12. Jackass. Would squander American power internationally.
huh?
13. Faggot ass position.
I might not agree with him here.
14. Yes
15. Yes
In short, looks like another menace to society. -
TL, BIDRoregonblitzkrieg said:Here are his most 'extreme' positions, at least according to one obviously biased website:
1. Eviscerate Entitlements: Believes that Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid are unconstitutional, and has compared the failure of federal courts to strike them down to the courts' failure to abolish slavery in the 19th century.
2. Lay Off Half His Cabinet: Wants to abolish half of all federal agencies, including the departments of Energy, Education, Agriculture, Commerce, Health and Human Services, Homeland Security, and Labor.
3. Enable State Extremism: Would let states set their own policies on abortion, gay marriage, prayer in school, and most other issues.
4. Protect Sexual Predators' Privacy: Voted against requiring operators of wi-fi networks who discover the transmission of child porn and other forms online sex predation to report it to the government.
5. Rescind the Bin Laden Raid: Instead of authorizing the Navy Seals to take him out, President Paul would have sought Pakistan's cooperation to arrest him.
6. Simplify the Census: The questions posed by the Census Bureau's annual American Community Survey, which collects demographics data such as age, race, and income, are "both ludicrous and insulting," Paul says.
7. Let the Oldest Profession Be: Paul wants to legalize prostitution at the federal level.
8. Legalize All Drugs: Including cocaine and heroin.
9. Keep Monopolies Intact: Opposes federal antitrust legislation, calling it "much more harmful than helpful." Thinks that monopolies can be controlled by protecting "the concept of the voluntary contract."
10. Lay Off Ben Bernanke: Would abolish the Federal Reserve and revert to use of currencies that are backed by hard assets such as gold.
11. Stop Policing the Environment: Believes that climate change is no big deal and the Environmental Protection Agency is unnecessary. Most environmental problems can be addressed by enforcing private-property rights. Paul also thinks that interstate issues such as air pollution are best dealt with through compacts between states.
12. Not Do Anything, but Still...: Would not have voted for the Civil Rights Act of 1964 because it was a "massive violation of private property and contract, which are the bedrocks of a free society."
13. Let Markets Care for the Disabled: "The ADA should have never been passed," Paul says. The treatment of the handicapped should be determined by the free market.
14. First, Do Harm: Wants to end birthright citizenship. Believes that emergency rooms should have the right to turn away illegal immigrants.
15. Diss Mother Teresa: Voted against giving her the Congressional Gold Medal. Has argued that the medal, which costs $30,000, is too expensive.
But if true:
1. Completely ludicrous.
2. Some of this should happen, but not all.
3. Excellent idea.
4. Agree. I don't like these people but privacy from the government trumps that.
5. Completely naïve and idiotic.
6. Who cares.
7. Completely retarded.
8. Even more retarded.
9. Fucking Door, Ass, Out stupid.
10. Maybe.
11. Naïve.
12. Jackass. Would squander American power internationally.
13. Faggot ass position. - How so? You know what pisses me off ... fucking ADA doesn't require bathrooms to have fucking child changing tables (having a shit machine is a disability). So when my shit machines were in diapers guess what companies stopped getting my business ... free market does work. I assume you have no idea the extremes the ADA goes to in some cases ...
14. Yes
15. Yes
In short, looks like another menace to society.
And you fucking lost me at the bolded disagreement.
-
No data here whatsoever, but I have a strong suspicion that the demographic data collected has wide-ranging impacts, particularly in areas like affirmative action.oregonblitzkrieg said:Here are his most 'extreme' positions, at least according to one obviously biased website:
6. Simplify the Census: The questions posed by the Census Bureau's annual American Community Survey, which collects demographics data such as age, race, and income, are "both ludicrous and insulting," Paul says.
A poster child for well-intended measures running rampant through ridiculous promulgated regulations. For example, I believe the requirement for expensive wheelchair lifts at hotel pools came out of ADA regs.oregonblitzkrieg said:
13. Let Markets Care for the Disabled: "The ADA should have never been passed," Paul says. The treatment of the handicapped should be determined by the free market.
-
The only real difference between the liberals and conservatives are just a few differences in things they believe the government should have control of over the people.
-
I haven't studied the ADA in depth so I don't know. Some of what is done is expensive and I do know of 1 business that didn't open after the county laid the ADA requirements on then. It made the seating in the place too limited to make it feasible. But like I said, that is an area I haven't looked into much.GrundleStiltzkin said:
No data here whatsoever, but I have a strong suspicion that the demographic data collected has wide-ranging impacts, particularly in areas like affirmative action.oregonblitzkrieg said:Here are his most 'extreme' positions, at least according to one obviously biased website:
6. Simplify the Census: The questions posed by the Census Bureau's annual American Community Survey, which collects demographics data such as age, race, and income, are "both ludicrous and insulting," Paul says.
A poster child for well-intended measures running rampant through ridiculous promulgated regulations. For example, I believe the requirement for expensive wheelchair lifts at hotel pools came out of ADA regs.oregonblitzkrieg said:
13. Let Markets Care for the Disabled: "The ADA should have never been passed," Paul says. The treatment of the handicapped should be determined by the free market. -
Why not let people buy and sell sex between consenting adults? Well, it would help spread more disease first of all. By bringing the practice out of the shadows and into the open more people would engage in it. And you can't just say it's an issue of personal freedom and liberty. Some of the bastards that get infected will then go home and sleep with their wives/girlfriends and either willfully infect them or do so without knowing they've got an STD. Also it's just plain fucking wrong it would make us look like even more of a degenerate society. As far as legalizing cocaine and heroin, are you insane? HEROIN?
-
The free market should not be in control of treatment of the handicapped, as the free market lacks a conscience. You might understand this position more if you actually know someone who is disabled.
-
W.jw.oregonblitzkrieg said:Why not let people buy and sell sex between consenting adults? Well, it would help spread more disease first of all. By bringing the practice out of the shadows and into the open more people would engage in it. And you can't just say it's an issue of personal freedom and liberty. Some of the bastards that get infected will then go home and sleep with their wives/girlfriends and either willfully infect them or do so without knowing they've got an STD. Also it's just plain fucking wrong it would make us look like even more of a degenerate society. As far as legalizing cocaine and heroin, are you insane? HEROIN?
I'm starting to think this is a whoosh.
You really haven't looked into things too deeply, have you?
You didn't watch the video, did you? -
I'll watch it if you first briefly explain why you think legalizing the deadly substance heroin would be a good idea. It will take a mammoth effort to convince me of that.MikeDamone said:
W.jw.oregonblitzkrieg said:Why not let people buy and sell sex between consenting adults? Well, it would help spread more disease first of all. By bringing the practice out of the shadows and into the open more people would engage in it. And you can't just say it's an issue of personal freedom and liberty. Some of the bastards that get infected will then go home and sleep with their wives/girlfriends and either willfully infect them or do so without knowing they've got an STD. Also it's just plain fucking wrong it would make us look like even more of a degenerate society. As far as legalizing cocaine and heroin, are you insane? HEROIN?
I'm starting to think this is a whoosh.
You really haven't looked into things too deeply, have you?
You didn't watch the video, did you? -
First off, it's an individual choice what to do with your body. I'm pro choice.oregonblitzkrieg said:
I'll watch it if you first briefly explain why you think legalizing the deadly substance heroin would be a good idea. It will take a mammoth effort to convince me of that.MikeDamone said:
W.jw.oregonblitzkrieg said:Why not let people buy and sell sex between consenting adults? Well, it would help spread more disease first of all. By bringing the practice out of the shadows and into the open more people would engage in it. And you can't just say it's an issue of personal freedom and liberty. Some of the bastards that get infected will then go home and sleep with their wives/girlfriends and either willfully infect them or do so without knowing they've got an STD. Also it's just plain fucking wrong it would make us look like even more of a degenerate society. As far as legalizing cocaine and heroin, are you insane? HEROIN?
I'm starting to think this is a whoosh.
You really haven't looked into things too deeply, have you?
You didn't watch the video, did you?
Outside of that, on balance the costs to society are much higher with prohibition.
druglibrary.org/think/~jnr/12reason.htm
-
MikeDamone said:
First off, it's an individual choice what to do with your body. I'm pro choice.oregonblitzkrieg said:
I'll watch it if you first briefly explain why you think legalizing the deadly substance heroin would be a good idea. It will take a mammoth effort to convince me of that.MikeDamone said:
W.jw.oregonblitzkrieg said:Why not let people buy and sell sex between consenting adults? Well, it would help spread more disease first of all. By bringing the practice out of the shadows and into the open more people would engage in it. And you can't just say it's an issue of personal freedom and liberty. Some of the bastards that get infected will then go home and sleep with their wives/girlfriends and either willfully infect them or do so without knowing they've got an STD. Also it's just plain fucking wrong it would make us look like even more of a degenerate society. As far as legalizing cocaine and heroin, are you insane? HEROIN?
I'm starting to think this is a whoosh.
You really haven't looked into things too deeply, have you?
You didn't watch the video, did you?
Outside of that, on balance the costs to society are much higher with prohibition.
druglibrary.org/think/~jnr/12reason.htm
1.) Legalizing drugs would make our streets and homes safer.
Remains to be seen.
"Conversely, if and when drugs are legalized, their price will collapse and so will the sundry drug-related motivations to commit crime. Consumers will no longer need to steal to support their habits. A packet of cocaine will be as tempting to grab from its owner as a pack of cigarettes is today. And drug dealers will be pushed out of the retail market by known retailers. When was the last time we saw employees of Rite Aid pharmacies shoot it out with Thrift Drugs for a corner storefront?"
A packet of cocaine will ALWAYS be more tempting to steal than a pack of cigarettes. Fact.
2.) It would put an end to prison overcrowding.
Agree, it would help.
3.) Drug legalization would free up police resources to fight crimes against people and property.
Agree.
4.) It would unclog the court system.
Agree
5.) It would reduce official corruption.
Agree
6.) Legalization would save tax money.
Agree
7.) It would cripple organized crime.
Partly agree. It would hamper organized crime. They will always find other rackets.
8.) Legal drugs would be safer. Legalization is a consumer protection issue.
Partly agree.
9.) Legalization would help stem the spread of AIDS and other diseases.
Agree
10.) Legalization would halt the erosion of other personal liberties.
Agree
11.) It would stabilize foreign countries and make them safer to live in and travel to.
Disagree. Legalizing it in the US will have no effect on safety of travel to Colombia or Afghanistan.
12.) Legalization would repair U.S. relations with other countries and curtail anti-American sentiment around the world.
Disagree. It will have minimal impact on anti-American sentiment.
Even though I agree with most of these reasons, I am against legalizing substances like heroin. Weed is one thing. Heroin is something else entirely. You can say that we should have the freedom to do what we want to our own bodies and that is true. But you should know that most of the people that use these substances are 'uninformed' of the true consequences of using them. A dumb 12 year old kid who sees rocks stars using heroin and thinks it's cool will not be considering the fact that he could wind up dead. Normalizing and legitimizing the use of a deadly substance isn't the answer. Maybe we should legalize cyanide pills and start selling them in shops for people who want to commit suicide? Fact is as long as this shit stays in the underground and in the shadows, it will be more difficult for potential users to procure it.
-
Jesus. So you agree with most of this but still miss the point and still didn't watch the video.
Heroin isn't "in the shadows" and it is very easy to get.
The cyanide pill argument is a strawman, but assisted suicide is legal in many places. And making suicide illegal by any means prevents no one from doing it.
Good day sir. -
Agree - he is in Kentucky, and his name is Rand Pauloregonblitzkrieg said:We need a new leader, but not from Texas. We saw how that went a few years ago.
It will be a battle though, expect the two party establishment and the mainstream media to twist away, like they did to Ron
Please no Jeb Bush/Chris Christie
Or god help us - Hillary on the other side -
I just watched the video. This debate isn't over. He makes many valid points, one of which is that legalizing these substances will produce more addicts. It will be easier to obtain and easier for children to get into it and become lifelong addicts. It will reduce the power of cartels and criminals, true. But it will only shift that power to the government, which will in effect become the cartel and the recipient of tax money generated by the sale of heroin, cocaine, etc. The government will then have an incentive to promote the use of destructive substances, and it will have a stake in getting people addicted young because it generates a new revenue flow for them. The government should not be in the business of telling us what we should do or not do to ourselves as long as we aren't harming other individuals. But it should also not be in the business of profiting from the sale of harmful substances. Even if they manage to regulate it so that it is 'safer,' it won't change the fact that it's highly addicting. Of course some people will latch onto this and say "then the government shouldn't be in the business of profiting from cupcake sales either, since sugar and sweets are addicting." That's a logical argument, but where does it end? Will lines be so blurred that safe heroin will be treated no differently that sugary cupcakes?MikeDamone said:Jesus. So you agree with most of this but still miss the point and still didn't watch the video.
Heroin isn't "in the shadows" and it is very easy to get.
The cyanide pill argument is a strawman, but assisted suicide is legal in many places. And making suicide illegal by any means prevents no one from doing it.
Good day sir.
You say heroin is easy to get. Maybe in slums like Seattle. I don't know where to find it. But I sure as fuck would know where to find it if I could buy it at the local Safeway. -
-
Why does OBK hate Sharky?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=88Wb0nAkDS0
No such thing as free pussy man. At least hookers are up front about it. They could be a lot safer if it was legal, too. Have you been to Amsterdam? -
You're all over the map and full of contradictions. Spend a bit more time on this and maybe we can have a decent and informed conversation.oregonblitzkrieg said:
I just watched the video. This debate isn't over. He makes many valid points, one of which is that legalizing these substances will produce more addicts. It will be easier to obtain and easier for children to get into it and become lifelong addicts. It will reduce the power of cartels and criminals, true. But it will only shift that power to the government, which will in effect become the cartel and the recipient of tax money generated by the sale of heroin, cocaine, etc. The government will then have an incentive to promote the use of destructive substances, and it will have a stake in getting people addicted young because it generates a new revenue flow for them. The government should not be in the business of telling us what we should do or not do to ourselves as long as we aren't harming other individuals. But it should also not be in the business of profiting from the sale of harmful substances. Even if they manage to regulate it so that it is 'safer,' it won't change the fact that it's highly addicting. Of course some people will latch onto this and say "then the government shouldn't be in the business of profiting from cupcake sales either, since sugar and sweets are addicting." That's a logical argument, but where does it end? Will lines be so blurred that safe heroin will be treated no differently that sugary cupcakes?MikeDamone said:Jesus. So you agree with most of this but still miss the point and still didn't watch the video.
Heroin isn't "in the shadows" and it is very easy to get.
The cyanide pill argument is a strawman, but assisted suicide is legal in many places. And making suicide illegal by any means prevents no one from doing it.
Good day sir.
You say heroin is easy to get. Maybe in slums like Seattle. I don't know where to find it. But I sure as fuck would know where to find it if I could buy it at the local Safeway.
-
I've been to Amsterdam. It's a kick ass city. If you go there get yourself a slice of spacecake and wander around without a map for a few hours. It's a trip. But making a hooker legal won't make her any less diseased. If anything it would be more likely she's infected with something, since more sex fiends would be having sex with her than if she was out on the streets hooking in the slums.PurpleJ said:Why does OBK hate Sharky?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=88Wb0nAkDS0
No such thing as free pussy man. At least hookers are up front about it. They could be a lot safer if it was legal, too. Have you been to Amsterdam? -
I understand. I wouldn't make a counterattack either when I'm running low on ammunition. Retreating under the guise of superiority is a good move. Anyway it'd be kind of hard to defend the position that the government should be profiting from heroin sales.MikeDamone said:
You're all over the map and full of contradictions. Spend a bit more time on this and maybe we can have a decent and informed conversation.oregonblitzkrieg said:
I just watched the video. This debate isn't over. He makes many valid points, one of which is that legalizing these substances will produce more addicts. It will be easier to obtain and easier for children to get into it and become lifelong addicts. It will reduce the power of cartels and criminals, true. But it will only shift that power to the government, which will in effect become the cartel and the recipient of tax money generated by the sale of heroin, cocaine, etc. The government will then have an incentive to promote the use of destructive substances, and it will have a stake in getting people addicted young because it generates a new revenue flow for them. The government should not be in the business of telling us what we should do or not do to ourselves as long as we aren't harming other individuals. But it should also not be in the business of profiting from the sale of harmful substances. Even if they manage to regulate it so that it is 'safer,' it won't change the fact that it's highly addicting. Of course some people will latch onto this and say "then the government shouldn't be in the business of profiting from cupcake sales either, since sugar and sweets are addicting." That's a logical argument, but where does it end? Will lines be so blurred that safe heroin will be treated no differently that sugary cupcakes?MikeDamone said:Jesus. So you agree with most of this but still miss the point and still didn't watch the video.
Heroin isn't "in the shadows" and it is very easy to get.
The cyanide pill argument is a strawman, but assisted suicide is legal in many places. And making suicide illegal by any means prevents no one from doing it.
Good day sir.
You say heroin is easy to get. Maybe in slums like Seattle. I don't know where to find it. But I sure as fuck would know where to find it if I could buy it at the local Safeway. -
This November. I will report back with pics or I will gtfo.PurpleJ said:Why does OBK hate Sharky?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=88Wb0nAkDS0
No such thing as free pussy man. At least hookers are up front about it. They could be a lot safer if it was legal, too. Have you been to Amsterdam? -
And obligatory: This thread delivers.
-
When did I say the government should profit from heroin sales. I said it should be legal. You automatically make the leap that the government needs to be involved. Look at the marijuana thread. I'm consistent in my comments regarding taxation. The failed war on drugs has left far more damage in its wake than drugs themselves could ever do. The damage has been immense and the resources wasted vast.oregonblitzkrieg said:
I understand. I wouldn't make a counterattack either when I'm running low on ammunition. Retreating under the guise of superiority is a good move. Anyway it'd be kind of hard to defend the position that the government should be profiting from heroin sales.MikeDamone said:
You're all over the map and full of contradictions. Spend a bit more time on this and maybe we can have a decent and informed conversation.oregonblitzkrieg said:
I just watched the video. This debate isn't over. He makes many valid points, one of which is that legalizing these substances will produce more addicts. It will be easier to obtain and easier for children to get into it and become lifelong addicts. It will reduce the power of cartels and criminals, true. But it will only shift that power to the government, which will in effect become the cartel and the recipient of tax money generated by the sale of heroin, cocaine, etc. The government will then have an incentive to promote the use of destructive substances, and it will have a stake in getting people addicted young because it generates a new revenue flow for them. The government should not be in the business of telling us what we should do or not do to ourselves as long as we aren't harming other individuals. But it should also not be in the business of profiting from the sale of harmful substances. Even if they manage to regulate it so that it is 'safer,' it won't change the fact that it's highly addicting. Of course some people will latch onto this and say "then the government shouldn't be in the business of profiting from cupcake sales either, since sugar and sweets are addicting." That's a logical argument, but where does it end? Will lines be so blurred that safe heroin will be treated no differently that sugary cupcakes?MikeDamone said:Jesus. So you agree with most of this but still miss the point and still didn't watch the video.
Heroin isn't "in the shadows" and it is very easy to get.
The cyanide pill argument is a strawman, but assisted suicide is legal in many places. And making suicide illegal by any means prevents no one from doing it.
Good day sir.
You say heroin is easy to get. Maybe in slums like Seattle. I don't know where to find it. But I sure as fuck would know where to find it if I could buy it at the local Safeway.
And if you think legal prostitution increases stds then you clearly haven't done your homework. I'd love to see your stats on that. It's legal in many parts of the developed world so you should be able to provide a lot of data showing disease and prostitution going hand in hand. Look at how it's done and the results in places like Australia and Canada.
Person freedom, choice, and liberty is what all this comes down to. I always find conservatives to be caricatures of themselves. They want less government expect whether want it use the force of government to control people and shove their beliefs on others. -
Did you squeal in a high pitch when you typed that?oregonblitzkrieg said:Why not let people buy and sell sex between consenting adults? Well, it would help spread more disease first of all. By bringing the practice out of the shadows and into the open more people would engage in it. And you can't just say it's an issue of personal freedom and liberty. Some of the bastards that get infected will then go home and sleep with their wives/girlfriends and either willfully infect them or do so without knowing they've got an STD. Also it's just plain fucking wrong it would make us look like even more of a degenerate society. As far as legalizing cocaine and heroin, are you insane? HEROIN?
The rest of that post is such drivel I could hardly stand to read it. Go have kids if you want to babysit someone, asshole.
-
Just so you are aware, blitzkrieg - Damone is owning you real bad right now.
-
You should hit up Thailand and see Sharky while you're at it. Maybe Legion of Splooge will be there with his daughter.Swaye said:
This November. I will report back with pics or I will gtfo.PurpleJ said:Why does OBK hate Sharky?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=88Wb0nAkDS0
No such thing as free pussy man. At least hookers are up front about it. They could be a lot safer if it was legal, too. Have you been to Amsterdam?
