Texas Leaders v. Obama

dflea said:

Just so you are aware, blitzkrieg - Damone is owning you real bad right now.

dflea said:

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?

Did you squeal in a high pitch when you typed that?

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.

MikeDamone said:

oregonblitzkrieg said:

MikeDamone said:

oregonblitzkrieg said:

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.

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?

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

dflea said:

oregonblitzkrieg said:

MikeDamone said:

oregonblitzkrieg said:

MikeDamone said:

oregonblitzkrieg said:

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.

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?

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

If heroin becomes legal the government will tax it, just like they do weed. No amount of arguing or reasoning on your part will change that fact. So you should just accept it as reality. That means the government will be profiting from getting us hooked on heroin and other drugs.

I'll leave the prostitution issue alone for now. But it makes sense that if its out in the open more people are going to be doing it. That hooker you're thinking about banging has been rammed by 20 more sex fiends because she's more visible. You can do the math. And if we're looking to Australia and Canada as examples of what we should become, we might as well mail it in and become a big France. Lets get more degenerate while adversaries like Russia get stronger. How did that work out for Rome?

First you say I'm a libtard now you're saying I'm a conservative. Make up your mind.

Truth is, you're just a fucking idiot. My mind is made up.