Next you will be avocating flinging our poo at each other to solve our differences.
You got to be kidding. Where did you get that?
I just quoted my 10 grade shop teacher when asking why we would have to follow a rule this inevitably ended up as his final statement
But in reality we have to understand that social actions have consequence. So this give us the right to enact laws to control behavior before that behavior happens. Punishing someone only after bad behavior happens leads to mob rule, vigilantism and all sort of over reaction. We need the rule and consequence to be in place before it becomes a outstanding problem .
Right now with current legalizing of pot there is not the infrastructure of rules to deal with usage. Almost all rules deal with illegal usage and it consequences. Federal and state law are currently at direct opposition to each other.
Personally my direct and indirect experiences with pot smokers lead me to believe we are better off without than with. Maybe one in ten experience no adverse effects on their life or lifestyle. The rest suffer some loss in potential or life quality whether they want to believe it or not.)And if your telling me it does not effect you just remember you can't truly judge the effect on the system unless you an outside observer.
Blather. Nothing but blather.
If a man fling poo at a tree, that is behavior. Absent other signs of insanity, it requires no intervention from society if it's his poo and his tree.
Consequences to non-consenting parties are what government can justly disincentivize with punishment, and make less likely through non-prohibitive regulation.
molon labe
montani semper liberi
para fides paternae patria
ladajo wrote:I am very much against a police state
No, you are fostering it. A police state is required to keep people from doing what they have a right to do.
That idiot blithering about consequentialist ethics seems not to see any better than you do, that a police state is a consequence of trying to make prohibition even trivially successful.
molon labe
montani semper liberi
para fides paternae patria
That same concept you disparage works plenty well enough to keep alcohol from children.
Now that is funny. You really are completely niave.
What keeps most kids from buying alcohol is that they are not addicted to it. You can have a few beers at a party every weekend and not become a drooling drunkard. Many kids do exactly that. If you really think that underage kids don't get alcohol, some of them just by walking into a shop and buying it, then you must not be from around here (here being earth).
It does not work the same with drugs. Once you start, the little green fairy keeps telling to you to take more and do it more often.
You so Funny. Wake up and smell reality my friend.
The development of atomic power, though it could confer unimaginable blessings on mankind, is something that is dreaded by the owners of coal mines and oil wells. (Hazlitt)
What I want to do is to look up C. . . . I call him the Forgotten Man. (Sumner)
A police state is required to keep people from doing what they have a right to do.
So in your world, what keeps people from harming others? Good will?
Or is it that they have a right to harm others? But then you will take them to court and tell them they no longer have that right once they exercise it.
What complete idiocy.
You have never had your ass kicked have you? And I am guessing that you never kicked the shit out of someone to protect yourself from their attack either.
The development of atomic power, though it could confer unimaginable blessings on mankind, is something that is dreaded by the owners of coal mines and oil wells. (Hazlitt)
What I want to do is to look up C. . . . I call him the Forgotten Man. (Sumner)
ladajo wrote:"No, you want to destroy the state...Wake up and see the real issues."
It is a real issue that people think they have a right to screw with other people and prevent them from enjoying the drug of their choice on their own time.
Doing that with any success requires the police state you support.
"They firmly believe they can not win"
They don't have my sympathy, they could always go get honest work.
molon labe
montani semper liberi
para fides paternae patria
It is clearly apparent that you have lead a sheltered life where Barney the Purple Whateverhewas was your best friend.
It is extremely clear you have never dealt with addicts.
I recommend that you take a trip to an inner city drug zone and go for some walks. You will meet some very interesting people.
At a minimum you have a substantial probability of getting your dumb ass rolled. Worst case is you will get dead.
Best part is that most likely they are exercising their rights and doing it while wasted.
A twofer. Yeah!
Go get your ass kicked by some "nice minding their own business" wasted folk. Then come talk to us, if you can.
The development of atomic power, though it could confer unimaginable blessings on mankind, is something that is dreaded by the owners of coal mines and oil wells. (Hazlitt)
What I want to do is to look up C. . . . I call him the Forgotten Man. (Sumner)
A police state is required to keep people from doing what they have a right to do.
So in your world, what keeps people from harming others? Good will?
Absolutely. The Founders weren't wrong. We don't need a police state. You know, the one you pretend out loud you oppose, but then support at every turn.
Or is it that they have a right to harm others? But then you will take them to court and tell them they no longer have that right once they exercise it.
No, they have no right to harm others. By what benighted, blinkered mental filter do you turn my explicitly saying no one has such a right, do you turn that into claim I said the opposite? Once someone has misused their rights in a criminal fashion, their further exercise of rights can be justly restricted.
What complete idiocy.
Yes, you are a complete idiot. You support a police state and claim you don't, and you evidently believe in thoughtcrime, which is all taking drugs illegally in and of itself could be--wrongthink.
You have never had your ass kicked have you? And I am guessing that you never kicked the shit out of someone to protect yourself from their attack either.
Wrong on both counts, but if you'd been right, how do you pretend that would change what is right and wrong from how I conceive it?
molon labe
montani semper liberi
para fides paternae patria
1) I was way too old for that dinosaur to be anything but an insipid irritation.
2) That would be my brother, who is a perfectly functional addict holding down a job who just got his bachelors. Go dude!
3) That whole third bit, probably not. I'm in a CCW* state, work it out for yourself.
4) You know, the fact they were wasted is a nullity, as far as it goes; it's the fact they are assaulting me that gives me the right to respond effectively to end their assault, and that is what would give a police officer the right to pursue them and arrest them for the crime after the fact, and which would justify their incarceration if found guilty.
*You know, the people who handle their firearms far more competently than police officers do.
molon labe
montani semper liberi
para fides paternae patria
I seriously doubt you have ever been in a fight. Arguing over stuffed animals when you are 8 years old does not count. Even if you shot them with your cap gun.
As for you having a CCW and a weapon. Right. If you did, and you ever found yourself where you might actually need to use the weapon, you would pee your pants with fright and not do anything useful except probably hurt yourself. It is easy to tell that you are not one who can look death in the eye calmly. You are too much of a liberal kook for that.
that is what would give a police officer the right to pursue them and arrest them for the crime after the fact
So, you are another who wants his cake and snort it too.
You don't want a police state, but you want police. In case you didn't notice in your delusions, but the norm in policing is to cite folks who have committed a crime.
But it would seem you have bought Simon's childish temper tantrum propaganda hook, line and sinker. You even think he doesn't want free and open access for all drugs.
It is outlayers that you claim are the norm. The police have their hands tied so effectively these days, that folks can get away with all sorts of shit right in front of them.
You think they are overbearing. This is comical. It took too many nutjob school shootings before the police finally figured out that storming is better than waiting. Unlike what liberal morons like you want. "Just wait them out, they will give up. They really don't want to hurt anyone. Besides, you might shoot the wrong person or someone may get hit with a stray bullet or such. An innocent person may even fall and get hurt. And god forbid that you actually shoot one of those poor misunderstood kids with guns. Why then we couldn't help them find themselves if that happened. Oh my...". It was liberal idiocy like yours that made the police fear law suits more than letting bad guys kill innocent people.
Again, I am very much against the current culture of "intimidate and dominate" in policing. But I am darn clear on how it go that way, unlike folks like you who preach love, peace, happiness and lack of personal responsibility for all. And as for your idiocy in recoginizing that you neccessitate police in your own Barney World reality for those who break rules. Oh, did you figure out that the police are going to have to go get them. Did you think about how they may go about that when facing a doped out nutjob holding folks hostage after killing his neighbours? Do you think they may need to be, oh my, aggressive? Do you think that when they repsond to a bar brawl that they may need to be aggressive to contain and control the mayhem? Or do you really think that when they show up in your fantasy world that just saying, "everybody calm down now, your friendly neighbourhood police are here to sort this out with kindness and fairness" that the raging madmen are going to stop and give each other hugs and kisses? Are you that stupid? God forbid a cop puts someone down. That would violate their rights and all don't cha know!
But of course, your issue is with those statistical outlayers where in a country of 300 Million People, sometimes the cops get it wrong. Guess what genius, I would wager that the average Joe gets it wrong way more than the average cop. But in your math that obviously means ALL COPS ARE BAD AND SHOULD BE EXTERMINATED. But Joe is not wrong, and should not be exterminated. In fact, he should be encouraged to embark on behaviours that will not only eventually be detrimental to himself (fine with me by the way, Natural Selection gene pool improvement and all), but also eventually detrimental to others (not fine by me at all).
You are such a liar to claim that you have an addict brother who is a productive successful college student. What a load of crap. When he commits suicide then come talk to me. That is what my addict brother did. And my addict sister has come close a few times herself. Of course, she was a beacon of citizenship in high school, Honors and AP straight A's, also an Elite level gymnast competing at the national level. Then the drugs started. She did not make it through her freshman year at GW Pre-Med. She did follow her suppliers to Newport Beach, CA trading sex for drugs. Nowadays, years later, she finds herself a single never been married mother working here and there as a waitress while getting high on the side. Personally, I worry for my nephew. He is getting old enough know to understand his mommy has issues with lying, cheating, stealing and lack of personal responsibility.
And don't get me started with what I have seen in Central and South America, as well as Africa and the Middle East, and not to mention Europe. You are an internet couch potato with no friggin' idea what you are spouting off about. You read some hearsay crap on some blogs and annoint yourself an instant expert.
Well guess what dumbass, you don't have a clue.
Go ahead, take that walk in the hood. See how far you go before you get done.
I hope I am around to see the zombies eat your brain.
You want to talk about addiction. Right. Too bad you don't actually know anything.
The development of atomic power, though it could confer unimaginable blessings on mankind, is something that is dreaded by the owners of coal mines and oil wells. (Hazlitt)
What I want to do is to look up C. . . . I call him the Forgotten Man. (Sumner)
There is no convincing someone who thinks that using their drug of choice, whatever it may be; should remain a crime. They have already chosen to become a law breaker to try their "drug of choice" and that decision to become an outlaw informs their sense of morality or lack thereof.
Perky is forever going to argue for an immoral position concerning drugs, because he sided with that position before he was an adult, and has invested himself in it ever since. There is no reasoning with such a person.
"Courage is not just a virtue, but the form of every virtue at the testing point." C. S. Lewis
"I seriously doubt you have ever been in a fight. Arguing over stuffed animals when you are 8 years old does not count. Even if you shot them with your cap gun."
Oh I was a bit older than that, and I'm glad there were no guns at all--at the time I didn't have one, it would have been the other guy who did. I fixed that as soon as had my own place, my dad is a pissant liberal.
"As for you having a CCW and a weapon. Right. If you did, and you ever found yourself where you might actually need to use the weapon, you would pee your pants with fright and not do anything useful except probably hurt yourself."
I've been in enough IDP type drills, and otherwise had to knock on wood, I know that's not how that would go down. For that matter, my nick-name from back when was Headshot, that's where I tend to land them. Which when it was paper was cool, but when it was paint, they found it un-nerving.
"It is easy to tell that you are not one who can look death in the eye calmly. You are too much of a liberal kook for that. "
How am I a liberal kook? I'm a classical liberal, which by today's lights makes me no liberal at all. I'm a troglodytic, rock-ribbed conservative. You idiots who think we need a police state are the Progressives, you just haven't kept up with your more au courant friends like Obama. You have the same goals of tyrannically controlling the people, you end up using the same goals and head towards producing sick societies that look the same.
"So, you are another who wants his cake and snort it too."
It's your pathology to be unable to believe anyone could put their faith in the abstract concept of liberty. I don't do or want to do drugs, alcohol and caffeine excepted. I just don't have an interest in the others, personally. I don't care and object to the concept that if someone else wants to do them--with that being their only questionable behavior--that they can have committed a crime.
"You don't want a police state, but you want police. In case you didn't notice in your delusions, but the norm in policing is to cite folks who have committed a crime."
Well no, the norm is to cite someone who has broken a law, with a good proportion being cited even there's no chance the person is guilty, quotas and all, and there's a whole lot that's illegal and not a crime at all There's at least two speeding tickets I've paid where the guy was flat wrong, and in one of those, the cop looked the judge square in the face and lied--I know cops will lie, and I know other cops don't care much when they do. The exceptions do not redeem the run-of-the-mill. There's also the fact you can beat the rap but not the ride. Funny you think having any police at all means having a police state, goes to your state of mind and the worth of your arguments.
"But it would seem you have bought Simon's childish temper tantrum propaganda hook, line and sinker. You even think he doesn't want free and open access for all drugs."
He wants the a priori prohibition to go away, and I fully agree. There's no excuse for it.
"It is outlayers that you claim are the norm."
No, it's the norm I'm claiming are the norm. The rare exceptions are the ones who rat out their colleagues and break the blue wall of silence, or the few chiefs who say, "Arm yourselves".
"The police have their hands tied so effectively these days, that folks can get away with all sorts of shit right in front of them."
A whole hell of a lot of which, they have a right to do in the first place.
"You think they are overbearing. This is comical."
They tend to be overbearing when they can be, they aren't too brave.
"It took too many nutjob school shootings before the police finally figured out that storming is better than waiting."
That'll last 'til one of these school shooters doesn't take their own life at the first sight of opposition, and instead pots a cop. That they'll be waiting for backup again.
"Unlike what liberal morons like you want. "Just wait them out, they will give up. They really don't want to hurt anyone."
Once again,you mistake me entirely. I knew the Columbine approach was wrong and decried it then.
"Besides, you might shoot the wrong person"
No, that's what cops do with relentless frequency compared to non-police citizens. In 2013 I think I heard of about twenty instances of NDs or even negligent homicide by LEO's and about 2 by non-police. And I watch assiduously for such in the news. Cops have about a fourfold liklihood af shooting the wrong person. It's like you don't have any sense of responsibility or something...I know, we get rid of immunity! Then maybe you'll learn trigger discipline, for the love of God. Unless you are actually going to shoot on purpose, keep you boogerhook off the bangswitch. As agroup, you cops have problems with that one.
"An innocent person may even fall and get hurt."
Amadou Diallo...
"And god forbid that you actually shoot one of those poor misunderstood kids with guns. Why then we couldn't help them find themselves if that happened. Oh my...". It was liberal idiocy like yours that made the police fear law suits more than letting bad guys kill innocent people."
If anyone draws on you, and you are in the right, I hope you ventilate them. But there should be no immunity when you screw up, which you do with regularity.
"Again, I am very much against the current culture of "intimidate and dominate" in policing."
BS.
" But I am darn clear on how it go that way, unlike folks like you who preach love, peace, happiness and lack of personal responsibility for all."
Wow, do you ever have me mistaken for someone else.
"And as for your idiocy in recoginizing that you neccessitate police in your own Barney World reality for those who break rules" -- You are becoming incoherent.
"Oh, did you figure out that the police are going to have to go get them. Did you think about how they may go about that when facing a doped out nutjob holding folks hostage after killing his neighbours?"
Nothing makes that more likely than prohibition.
"Do you think they may need to be, oh my, aggressive? Do you think that when they repsond to a bar brawl that they may need to be aggressive to contain and control the mayhem? Or do you really think that when they show up in your fantasy world that just saying, "everybody calm down now, your friendly neighbourhood police are here to sort this out with kindness and fairness" that the raging madmen are going to stop and give each other hugs and kisses? Are you that stupid? God forbid a cop puts someone down. That would violate their rights and all don't cha know!
I'm beginning to think you have issues that show up in your service record. You're losing your shit on the keyboard. You expect me to think you've kept your cool on the job?
"But of course, your issue is with those statistical outlayers where in a country of 300 Million People, sometimes the cops get it wrong. Guess what genius, I would wager that the average Joe gets it wrong way more than the average cop."
Are you a cop, for real? Do you really have that job and not know Joe Average has about 1/4* the odds of shooting the wrong person in an encounter where a gun is fired, compared to cop?
"But in your math that obviously means ALL COPS ARE BAD AND SHOULD BE EXTERMINATED" -- Whaa? Again, you are becoming incoherent and losing your shit on the keyboard. I almost feel bad for you.
"But Joe is not wrong, and should not be exterminated. In fact, he should be encouraged to embark on behaviours that will not only eventually be detrimental to himself (fine with me by the way, Natural Selection gene pool improvement and all), but also eventually detrimental to others (not fine by me at all)."
So when they are detrimental to others persons or property, THEN you have a good reason to arrest them. Not before. It's an easy concept that when applied fully lets you focus on and take risks only for what is really important
"You are such a liar to claim that you have an addict brother who is a productive successful college student."
I fed him dinner last week in celebration, I have never lied once on this forum.
"When he commits suicide then come talk to me."
He may well, he has other issues and has had them for a long time. Frankly, his extra-curricular activities seem to have helped with that, and more power to him. He'll probably have his house paid off before I do, unless he leaves us early.
"That is what my addict brother did. And my addict sister has come close a few times herself. Of course, she was a beacon of citizenship in high school, Honors and AP straight A's, also an Elite level gymnast competing at the national level. Then the drugs started. She did not make it through her freshman year at GW Pre-Med. She did follow her suppliers to Newport Beach, CA trading sex for drugs. Nowadays, years later, she finds herself a single never been married mother working here and there as a waitress while getting high on the side. Personally, I worry for my nephew. He is getting old enough know to understand his mommy has issues with lying, cheating, stealing and lack of personal responsibility. "
Sorry to hear that. Prohibition helped a whole lot there, didn't it? You dumbass.
"And don't get me started with what I have seen in Central and South America, as well as Africa and the Middle East, and not to mention Europe. You are an internet couch potato with no friggin' idea what you are spouting off about. You read some hearsay crap on some blogs and annoint yourself an instant expert."
Well on what's right and wrong for government to try to do, I've got you beat. There's nothing about prohibition that can make what you're talking about better. Oh, and the last time I remember hearing about a cop committing negligent homicide, he was serving a drug warrant, there were no drugs, and he shot a mom in front of her kids in the face with an M-16, because he had his finger on the trigger and flash bang went off, startling him into shooting her through the door she was trying to answer. That's your average cop, waiting to happen. You and him are peas in a pod, he was a good little drug warrior too. Maybe (I hope locally, and have some reason to think so) there are whole departments that are far better than that.
"Well guess what dumbass, you don't have a clue"
Going on 100 years of expensive, useless prohibition, and the one without the clue is me?
"Go ahead, take that walk in the hood. See how far you go before you get done."
Buy me the tickets and get a piece of gunpaper ok'ed, I'll consider wearing a frick tutu doing it, blowhard. Even odds I never have to draw or show.
"I hope I am around to see the zombies eat your brain.'
Just bring lots of that chalk for what I leave behind me, if it comes to it, I have no illusions about what your and Obama's two camps of Progressive policies have made some parts of our cities into. Course I also wouldn't go up Black's Mountain in West Virginia for no reason, come to think of it...
"You want to talk about addiction. Right. Too bad you don't actually know anything."
I know most people who do drugs never become addicted, and many who become addicted stay functional. I know the main reason the use of drugs causes problems in most people's lives, had nothing to do with the drugs, the grief happens because of the illegality of it. I know the illegality of drugs produces no net positives at all. It's all downside.
Last edited by TDPerk on Mon Jan 20, 2014 3:31 am, edited 1 time in total.
molon labe
montani semper liberi
para fides paternae patria
GIThruster wrote:There is no convincing someone who thinks that using their drug of choice, whatever it may be; should remain a crime. They have already chosen to become a law breaker to try their "drug of choice" and that decision to become an outlaw informs their sense of morality or lack thereof.
Perky is forever going to argue for an immoral position concerning drugs, because he sided with that position before he was an adult, and has invested himself in it ever since. There is no reasoning with such a person.
You are such a child, what drug do you think I do?
molon labe
montani semper liberi
para fides paternae patria
And you certainly aren't who you want to think you are.
"headshot". Right. Oh, I forgot, you are king of paintball. That makes you truly credible.
The funny part is that in your blind stupidity you fail to see that I am not a supporter of prohibition. I am also not a supporter of "intimidate and dominate" policing. Which is part of the reason I chose not to continue in law enforcement. These are things I have stated here in this blog many times. You also fail to see that I am a big supporter of personal freedom and small government.
As far as prohibition goes, I guess my crime is that I do not yet see a better answer. the risks are too high to go the route of Simon's total freedom approach.
You are an idiot.
The development of atomic power, though it could confer unimaginable blessings on mankind, is something that is dreaded by the owners of coal mines and oil wells. (Hazlitt)
What I want to do is to look up C. . . . I call him the Forgotten Man. (Sumner)
I think I've been really clear about it. You go ahead and tell yourself what ever lies you need to.
Lead too, not just paint, and long marches with heavy loads. Bugs when it isn't cold. There's something I have faith in that you don't.
The idiot here is you and Diogenes.
You helped get your brother killed, and you can't even say it.
But I think you can see it. It why you lose it so bad on this topic, I think.
Same thing, we'd see a lot more alcoholics dying if that prohibition were still in effect.
I have no respect for you or Diogenes, because you've learned the wrong lessons from your life and you are desperately trying to hold on to the harm you're doing tens of millions of people for no good reason at all.
molon labe
montani semper liberi
para fides paternae patria
when asking why we would have to follow a rule this inevitably ended up as his final statement