Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Log In

A valid email is required.
Password is required.
Site Notices
6/21/2017 8:25:40 PM
Posted: 7/5/2001 7:31:29 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 7/5/2001 7:29:21 PM EDT by lordtrader]
So you say you support freedom. The right for each man to decide his own faith. Choose or not choose. So why is it that the use of drugs is look down upon. Is this not a choice that one makes? Much like firearms, you choose to own one. You choose on how to use it. You can hurt other people. You can hurt yourself. Or you can have fun with it. What about religion? Is it not your choice to recognize or not recognize a religion. So why is devil worship so wrong. Is it not your freedom to practice any religion you choose to? So why do you support one form of freedom of choice over another? If you yourself is a freedom lover, why would you hinder someone else of their own freedom to choose that you do not agree with? [i]DISCLAIMER: I do not condone the use of drugs. Yes I have done them and enjoyed them in the past, no longer. However I do not encourage anyone to take them, but if they want to, so be it. Just not around me please.[/i]
Link Posted: 7/5/2001 7:38:54 PM EDT
Just let the kids have their dope!, like anyone can stop them.
Link Posted: 7/5/2001 7:42:17 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Fallschirmjaegar: Just let the kids have their dope!, like anyone can stop them.
View Quote
LOL. I think we should at least require the dealers to card em. No one under 16. Kinda like cigarattes.
Link Posted: 7/5/2001 7:48:11 PM EDT
I believe if drugs were regulated and taxed, the kids would do them less. It might also prevent some overdoses and bad stuff if Bayer was making the speed and heroin instead of Johnny Gangbanger.
Link Posted: 7/5/2001 8:01:24 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 7/5/2001 7:59:36 PM EDT by Son of Liberty]
First off, let me say that I do not condone the use of drugs, and I do not use them myself. That said, I must agree with you, LT. In a [i]free[/i] society, a person has the right to do anything he wants unless that action causes some kind of injury to another. If a person decides that he is going to do something that might cause him to lose his own life, that is up to him, and is none of my business, or anyone else's. If that person is old enough to make the choice, then it is he who will suffer the consequences. We, as a collective nation, have no right to legislate morality on others. I have expressed this opinion to others, and they seem shocked that I could be so [i]unfeeling[/i]. That is not the case. It is not that I am unfeeling, it is just that I have no right to tell another person what he can and cannot do. I do believe, however, that if a person is genuinely seeking help to overcome an abuse problem, that he should be helped. (Insert Faith-Based-Initiative plug here.) Instead of spending billions of dollars each year on the so-called War on Drugs, maybe we should instead use this money on rehabilitation. The problem with drugs is that since it is a very risky business, the money to be made selling and transporting drugs is ridiculously high. If drugs were legalized, the demand would bottom out, and drug dealing would not be the lucrative business that it is. This would make the street value go down, and selling drugs would be no more advantageous than having a normal job. Of course having the street value go down would make them much more obtainable, so maybe they should be taxed and regulated just like any other imported item. For those drugs that normally end up harming another, the seller should be liable for the injury or death of someone who used his product, just like any other product. The War on Drugs is a complete and utter failure, but we continue to dump huge amounts of money into it. When are we going to learn, and let our senators and representatives know that we no longer want our money wasted on a bottomless money pit? We probably won’t, and truthfully, that doesn’t surprise me. That just seems to be the attitude of Americans today. SOL
Link Posted: 7/5/2001 8:05:44 PM EDT
I believe if drugs were regulated and taxed, the kids would do them less
View Quote
NO legitimate business would ever sell drugs, the first person who took it and jumped out a window, goes berzerk, or OD's will the sue the $hit out of the manufacturer. Hell you can't even sell cigarettes without getting billion dollar lawsuits against you. The massive potential defective products lawsuits would stop any legitimate business from even dreaming of selling such an inherently dangerous product. Thus, we will have an unregulated blackmarket, with no accountability, and no taxation (if they have to sell it secretly to avoid tort liability they aren't gonna pay taxes either). Sounds alot like what we got now.
Link Posted: 7/5/2001 8:09:44 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Son of Liberty: For those drugs that normally end up harming another, the seller should be liable for the injury or death of someone who used his product, just like any other product.
View Quote
So does this mean you support the lawsuits against gunmakers. Not flaming you or anything. But is this not the same type of logic the anti's are using?
Link Posted: 7/5/2001 8:40:31 PM EDT
Originally Posted By lordtrader:
Originally Posted By Son of Liberty: For those drugs that normally end up harming another, the seller should be liable for the injury or death of someone who used his product, just like any other product.
View Quote
So does this mean you support the lawsuits against gunmakers. Not flaming you or anything. But is this not the same type of logic the anti's are using?
View Quote
No, I do not support the lawsuits against gunmakers. Very interesting point, LT... Might require some thought on that one. My take on it, is that the seller of the nastier drugs is selling a product that he knows will harm the buyer using it as intended. The gun, on the other hand, will not harm the buyer, if used as intended. But I suppose that the buyer [i]should[/i] be aware of the dangers of the product that he is about to buy. But intention, I suspect, is tough to claim in court, so possibly a revision of my belief on the subject is in order. I guess that is something to think about, LT. Good point. SOL
Link Posted: 7/5/2001 8:58:11 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Avtomat:
I believe if drugs were regulated and taxed, the kids would do them less
View Quote
NO legitimate business would ever sell drugs, the first person who took it and jumped out a window, goes berzerk, or OD's will the sue the $hit out of the manufacturer. Hell you can't even sell cigarettes without getting billion dollar lawsuits against you. The massive potential defective products lawsuits would stop any legitimate business from even dreaming of selling such an inherently dangerous product. Thus, we will have an unregulated blackmarket, with no accountability, and no taxation (if they have to sell it secretly to avoid tort liability they aren't gonna pay taxes either). Sounds alot like what we got now.
View Quote
whats a ligitimate business? buy and use at your own risk. abolish the IRS [:)] do all products have to be regulated? so some shmoe can sue a buisness because he hurt his own health by his choice. screw'em leagalize poor health choices lib
Link Posted: 7/6/2001 5:19:52 AM EDT
Link Posted: 7/6/2001 5:27:39 AM EDT
whats a ligitimate business? buy and use at your own risk. abolish the IRS do all products have to be regulated? so some shmoe can sue a buisness because he hurt his own health by his choice. screw'em
View Quote
Lets say you buy an AR-15. The morons who built it (we won't name companies) were negligent in its design and manufacture. They failed to act as a reasonable person the firearm's manufacture. You go out to the range, and it blows up on the first shot, peeling your face back. Under your argument, you have no recourse, as you assumed the risk. Fortunatly, defective product law (or even basic tort law, for that matter) offers more relief. It's just like cases where prescription drugs turn people's teeth yellow or cause birth defects, firestone tires, ford pinto's, E. coli in beef, etc etc etc. When a manufacturer turns out crack cocaine, and someone is injured by it, I submit to you that person will sue the hell out of the maker and win the legal lottery. Thus persons who sell crack rock in the legalized drug paradise will have to be persons who do not fear tort liability (lawsuits). No stores or businesses would dare sell it. Undoubtably, those persons would be the same criminal element selling such now. Drugs would be sold for human consumption. If you sell a product for such, it must be safe. Now that's not the same as a person consuming a product that wasn't meant to be consumed and thus being injured. If you suggest that should not be, then we will have to overhaul our entire tort law, and that, I submit to you, is far less likely than the legalization of drugs.
Link Posted: 7/6/2001 5:29:27 AM EDT
Totally agree with Tim. Sometimes I believe the drug war is just a boogyman excuse to strip our freedoms away.
Link Posted: 7/6/2001 5:32:35 AM EDT
whoah, Tim J, a little extreme, don't you think? i mean killing people just because in YOUR opinion they made some wrong choices?? what if i said i hate alcohol, and i want all hop and barley growers shot, hate all drunks, and wanted to kill everyone involved in the process of allowing my kids to make the bad choice of drinking a beer. what did drugs/drug users ever do to you?
Link Posted: 7/6/2001 5:39:41 AM EDT
OK I think you guys maybe missing the focus of my post and honing in on one subject, which is drugs. What I wanted to discuss is the bias in the freedoms we deem acceptable. Be it religion, recreational drugs, or firearms. What makes a freedom of choice welcomed for one thing and not another. Let's take devil worship. Why is it frowned upon, in some states illegal. However Catholicism is welcome. Are they not both religions? Do we then only allow freedom to what the masses feel is right? If so then we are allowing freedom to happen, which is not freedom in the fullest sense. You then become the opressee instead of the opressed. That is where the gov't stands now. Their constant legislating of the people have made them hypocrits. We as freedom loving gun owners have become biased. Is there really a free man. Free of bias and prejudice against and from other men?
Link Posted: 7/6/2001 5:41:20 AM EDT
LT - Here's a 'religious" perspective. Man can make whatever laws he wishes. But nowhere in the Bible are we encouraged or even permitted to use man's laws to coerce or suggest a moral course of action. I consider it "immoral" to use drugs, I consider it "immoral" to engage in extra-marital sex, I consider it "immoral" to lie. But "man's laws" are NOT the proper vehicle to create morality within a nation. That can ONLY be done on a person by person basis, instructing man in God's laws one person at a time. Many have tried to FORCE God's laws on man. The ENTIRE Old Testament of the Bible is illustration of what a huge failure that is. Comparatively, many "Christians" KNOWING how badly these immoral acts will harm those who engage in them, have tried to use man's laws to "protect" their fellow man. Its wrong to do, and it doesn't work. Lastly, what are "man's laws??" They are a social construct that men agree upon to subject themselves to. Personally, I believe in allowing freedom to do pretty much ANYTHING a person wants, UNTIL it harms another. Some illustrations: 1. Public second hand cigarete smoke - at a public place, like a ball park or a restaurant or a street corner, second hand smoke "harms" me. Sorry - outlaw it. Do what you want in your home, but don't spray your death cloud over me. Or I will make a swap with you - your smoke on me, my urine on you. Deal???? 2. Cell phone use while driving - not a problem. But if its proven that it caused an accident while driving, and another person is killed, EXECUTE the cell phone user. If another person is injured, INJURE the cell phone user to the same extent. My opinion.
Link Posted: 7/6/2001 5:46:34 AM EDT
Originally Posted By lordtrader: OK I think you guys maybe missing the focus of my post and honing in on one subject, which is drugs. What I wanted to discuss is the bias in the freedoms we deem acceptable. Be it religion, recreational drugs, or firearms. What makes a freedom of choice welcomed for one thing and not another. Let's take devil worship. Why is it frowned upon, in some states illegal. However Catholicism is welcome. Are they not both religions? Do we then only allow freedom to what the masses feel is right? If so then we are allowing freedom to happen, which is not freedom in the fullest sense. You then become the opressee instead of the opressed. That is where the gov't stands now. Their constant legislating of the people have made them hypocrits. We as freedom loving gun owners have become biased. Is there really a free man. Free of bias and prejudice against and from other men?
View Quote
no, i didn't miss the point, drugs are a great example. we americans go through life accepting SOCIETAL NORMS. these are what say that it is not ok to have nude women on outdoor billboards, not ok to yell fire in a theater, and alcohol is ok, but pot is not. it is OUR particular society which prescribes these norms - pot is legal in the netherlands, nudity in germany, and alcohol banned in islam. it is OUR society that was founded on judeo-christian principles, NOT on satanic ones. we are FREE to DECIDE, which path to take, but we are also FREE to get looked down upon by our peers for belonging to a satanic "cult" or smoking a joint in college.
Link Posted: 7/6/2001 6:22:08 AM EDT
I am all for people using whatever they want on their own bodies, 100% If people need an escape from their lives, they ought to be able to buy whatever drug they choose, it is their life after all. If kids want to do drug , they are going to do them whether we condone it or not, raise them right and they won't want to. It is silly to think that anyone is going to be able to stop someone from doing with their body as they please. It is also a waste of our money and it is a serious blow to our freedoms. Does anyone here think that Hillary, CHarlie Schumer Barbara Feinstein and their ilk know best for us?
Link Posted: 7/6/2001 6:23:08 AM EDT
LT, It's not that hard to conceptualize. It's basically the premise that you should be able to do what ever you want so long as it doesn't infringe upon my right to do the same. Worship the Devil. I don't care (well I do but I won't interfere). But if you want to offer my new born baby as a sacrifice, be prepared to meet Satan soon. Drive drunk. But if you plow into my kid you have the choice of a public stoning or I get the oportunity to try to run you down in an open field with a Hum V. Try to sell my minor children crack. I'll bust your nose or shoot you up with an 8 ball. There are some parts where I start to wobble. I don't think there should be restrictions on firearms. How far do take that. Should anyone be allowed to own a thermo nuclear device. Islama Binladin? What about the comment about naked people on bill boards, or say, having sex in public or sexualy explict material on your own property but visible to the world? Is your desire to do this type of stuff infringing on my desire to shield my minor children from it? Can I not take them out in public, moving about freely at home and abroad?
Link Posted: 7/6/2001 6:28:06 AM EDT
Yup - what halfcocked said. HC - Your carry gun may be "halfcocked" but your thinking ain't. In the X-ring, baby.
Link Posted: 7/6/2001 6:34:49 AM EDT
I think the war on drugs is completely unconstitutional. I think all drugs should be made legal and if you want to sit at home and waste your brain or OD and kill yourself that that is your perogative. I personally don't do drugs, but I couldn't care less if anybody else does. I don't think of drugs as being any different than alcohol. Also, the drug companies should be immune to lawsuits based upon the misuse of their products. Any warnings or possible consequences of taking the drugs should be placed upon the container and then you use them at your own risk, kind of like a pool without a lifeguard. Life, liberty and the persuit of happiness. If getting high and wasting your life is what makes you happy then Im all for it. However, most people would just take the drugs on the weekend, like they do now, and go on with their lives as productive citizens but nobody really wants to hear that do they.... Michael
Link Posted: 7/6/2001 6:37:10 AM EDT
Actually if you think about it, the prohibition of drugs is kind of like letting the weak survive to contaminate the gene pool.
Link Posted: 7/6/2001 6:40:52 AM EDT
Let me address the "Drugs vs. Alcohol" issue. The reason drug are illegal, but booze flows freely??? [size=6] FOLLOW THE $$$$ [/size=6] The Kennedy's personal fortune was all made in the alcohol industry. Prohibition ended roughly the same time the Kennedy's were becoming a national political force. Alcohol has remained legal, while drugs have been "demonized" becasue of those who stood to lose $$$ if alcohol was treated like drugs. The Kennedy's. AT least in part.
Link Posted: 7/6/2001 6:43:11 AM EDT
Originally Posted By garandman: Let me address the "Drugs vs. Alcohol" issue. The reason drug are illegal, but booze flows freely??? [size=6] FOLLOW THE $$$$ [/size=6] The Kennedy's personal fortune was all made in the alcohol industry. Prohibition ended roughly the same time the Kennedy's were becoming a national political force. Alcohol has remained legal, while drugs have been "demonized" becasue of those who stood to lose $$$ if alcohol was treated like drugs. The Kennedy's. AT least in part.
View Quote
so...does that make it more RIGHT to consume alcohol vs. pot?
Link Posted: 7/6/2001 6:45:07 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Halfcocked: Actually if you think about it, the prohibition of drugs is kind of like letting the weak survive to contaminate the gene pool.
View Quote
Yup, again. I'll even take that thought a little further. ABORTION "weakens" the gene pool as well - killing off what quite possibly would be the next great evolition of the species - to the tune of 1,000,000+ per year. Now, i don't want to start an abortion debate here. It just cheese me off that evolutionists don't have the courage of their convictions to take their evolutionary theory to its logical conclusion. (not intended to indicate HC agrees with my thoughts on the abortion / evolution connection)
Link Posted: 7/6/2001 6:49:54 AM EDT
Originally Posted By fattym4: so...does that make it more RIGHT to consume alcohol vs. pot?
View Quote
In the eyes of man's laws, YES, obviously (alcohol - good, drugs - bad) For the Christian, NO, biblically. The Bible indicates that a Christian's body is the dwelling place of the Holy Ghost, and therefore, the Christinas body is NOT his to do with as he pleases. The body is to be respected and not abused. For teh non-Christian, I'm NOT aware of any Biblical prohibition against alcohol or drug use. The non-Christian SHOULD however, be aware, that their non_Christian status (NOT their abuse of drugs or alcohol) WILL have eternal ramifications for them. VERY unpleasant ones. Its in teh Bible.
Link Posted: 7/6/2001 7:53:55 AM EDT
Link Posted: 7/6/2001 8:05:26 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Tim J: FattyM4, I never claimed my response was reasoned or logical. It is an inconsistency I wrestle with whenever the subject comes up. However I have a visceral response to it, I can get into a rage real quick if I do not control it. I can reason, and agree with LT, yeah, none of my bizness, but I could also raid a drug lab, kill everyone there, and feel little to no remorse about it. Actually, druggies have never really done anything to me. I hate them, they hate me, we leave each other alone, for the most part, although I will not tolerate them in my neighborhood and have gotten at least one heroin dealer nailed. Tim
View Quote
that's cool, i can respect that. but it also shows LT what is going on, his question is about freedom of CHOICE. in the above scenario, your son said "Mr. So gave me (drugs)..." the way i see it, your son CHOSE to except the drugs or whatever. so your rage should be directed at yourself for not teaching him enough sense to make the "right" CHOICES, whatever they are...
Link Posted: 7/6/2001 8:17:04 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 7/6/2001 8:14:17 AM EDT by TimJ]
Link Posted: 7/6/2001 8:22:03 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 7/6/2001 8:23:32 AM EDT by fattym4]
...definately NOT trying to start trouble, BTW!!! LoardTrader, i think it all comes down to tolerence. i think guys like Tim J tolerate people's bad choices until it affects them personally - on the other side, you have people who will try to impose their will upon you for whatever reason. like i said, we are free to mess up, we are also free to never hear the end of it! and by messing up, all i mean is going against SOCIETY'S grain, not necessarily the legal one, where it is a matter of opinion wether one messed up or not...it will always be a matter of opinion until it is made into law. just look at some examples: alcohol = legal, but is it RIGHT to consume? abortion = legal, but is right? satanism = legal, but is it right? society decides what is acceptable, courts decide what is legal, and polititions debate the "right and wrong" for us... ..edited for the same reason as Tim J...[;)]
Link Posted: 7/6/2001 10:16:45 AM EDT
Lots of good points on both sides of the isle. But regardless of if your opinion is based on religion, society,or basic freedoms there is one thing that must come to the forefront. That is personal responsibility. If you drink, drive and hurt/kill someone you should be required to pay for that in a commensurate manner. The same with drug use. Everyone (including those who have never used it) knows that it makes you high. But even the antis who want to remove guns from us, are willing to allow assailants the right to blame their actions on everything but themselves. So as a result gun makers or the NRA are responsible for shootings. Although it may seem barbaric to some, The eye for an eye practice would go a long way towards protecting the innocent and removing the need for liberals to try to remove our freedoms. My .02
Link Posted: 7/6/2001 10:36:35 AM EDT
I thimk TreetopFlyer has hit on it pretty well here. let me attempt to summarize - "What ya have here is classsical leftist mentality. In their mindset, their lack of backbone to punish the guilty is corrected by restricting the freedoms of the innocent." --garandman
Link Posted: 7/6/2001 10:39:23 AM EDT
So I guess the consensus to this question is that freedom is based on the society you live in. Within that there is a religious freedom that each man must recognize as well. So with that in mind, our society(not just the US) seems to be leaning towards the removal of our rights to firearms and the overall attempt to eradicate drugs and not drug users. Failed attempts at holy wars. [b]Scary future isn't it[/b] I kinda went a round about way of getting my point accross, but the bottomline is; [b] Times are changing[/b] And some things will change to someones negatives views, but society will condone it as a whole. Take a look at TV. Back in the 50's the word bitch and ass were taboo. Now it is tolerated and even accepted by some. Currently gun are,.....dare I say it.....tolerated by the masses. Will that no longer be true in 40yrs as society evolves? Hmmmm I wonder.
Link Posted: 7/6/2001 11:31:08 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Avtomat:
I believe if drugs were regulated and taxed, the kids would do them less
View Quote
NO legitimate business would ever sell drugs, the first person who took it and jumped out a window, goes berzerk, or OD's will the sue the $hit out of the manufacturer. Hell you can't even sell cigarettes without getting billion dollar lawsuits against you. The massive potential defective products lawsuits would stop any legitimate business from even dreaming of selling such an inherently dangerous product. Thus, we will have an unregulated blackmarket, with no accountability, and no taxation (if they have to sell it secretly to avoid tort liability they aren't gonna pay taxes either). Sounds alot like what we got now.
View Quote
If you've ever taken an econ class, then you would have to agree with this. Legalization will not ever work if followed with tort liability.
Link Posted: 7/6/2001 12:50:25 PM EDT
Originally Posted By garandman:
Originally Posted By fattym4: so...does that make it more RIGHT to consume alcohol vs. pot?
View Quote
In the eyes of man's laws, YES, obviously (alcohol - good, drugs - bad) For the Christian, NO, biblically. The Bible indicates that a Christian's body is the dwelling place of the Holy Ghost, and therefore, the Christinas body is NOT his to do with as he pleases. The body is to be respected and not abused. For teh non-Christian, I'm NOT aware of any Biblical prohibition against alcohol or drug use. The non-Christian SHOULD however, be aware, that their non_Christian status (NOT their abuse of drugs or alcohol) WILL have eternal ramifications for them. VERY unpleasant ones. Its in teh Bible.
View Quote
Okay I call BULLSHIT here. "It's in the Bible" What is that? How about chapter and verse please? If the body is the temple of the holy spirit, and it is not to be harmed (do all drugs harm? Another debate for another time) than why did Jesus Himself turn water into wine at the last supper? Seems water wasn't good enough for The Man. Nope, he wanted DRUGS in liquid form for His last dinner...... I've done quite a bit of research on the subject of alcohol and drugs in the bible. I'm away from my reference matereal right now, but I suggest a close read of Duteronomy. In Duteronomy it is written that kings and leaders of nations should not consume drink lest their judgement be impared. But if a poor begger on the street requests alcohol you should provide it to him so that he can forget his troubles. I'll dig up the chapter and verse if you like. Godspeed
Link Posted: 7/6/2001 1:48:28 PM EDT
I don't accept because a person is willing to accept responsibility for his actions, he should then be able to do what he wants. To believe that people that use drugs or alcohol stay at home and don't drive or create dangerous situations is totally wrong. I don't want to hear I'm sorry after someone is injured or killed.. It's a common sense issue not only a personal freedom issue. You can't kill someone just because you have a bad habit, and afterwards excuse your crime by shouting personal freedom at the top of you lungs. Laws are made to protect innocent people from assholes that have no conscience,responsibility,have already ruined their lives or simply just don't give a damn.
Link Posted: 7/6/2001 2:33:19 PM EDT
Godspeed, I'm with you. To me, alcohol and drugs are the same thing and Jesus H. Christ didn't have any problem giving wine to the masses. I don't like drugs and I have no use for alcohol. But we should be free to make the decision for ourselves. Marijuana should not be classified as a drug or at least not in the same classification as cocaine and heroine. I believe it should be legal and sold in shops much like how they do it in Amsterdam. A war against marijuana is rediculous. Why do kids do drugs? Because it's easier for them to get than alcohol. If marijuana was legal, it would be harder for our kids to get it as well. Do you think dealers ask for ID when selling a bag? Of course not, but a shop selling it most definately would, as they don't want to lose their license. I also believe that the war on drugs has done more to erode our rights than anything else. It must be stopped, but it won't. I was part of the war on drugs in the USMC in central and south america, we burned some fields, made arrests, destroyed poor people's lives, while we left the next field and workers alone (the ones owned by members of the corrupt governments). The war on drugs is a joke. The CIA has brought more drugs into this country than can be believed. DEA agents are some of the most corrupt govt employees in the world. Billions upon billions of our tax dollars have been wasted. For what? You can still get any drug you want very easily. What have these billions of dollars accomplished? Not a damn thing. I say we stop wasting our money on this bullshit war, legalize marijuana and possibly some other drugs, and let people live their lives free to persue happiness or whatever. Who are the morons that are still pushing for the war on drugs? Who is stupid enough to think it's making any difference in drug availability on the street. Those people really need to pull their heads out of their asses and stop wasting my freaking tax dollars.
Link Posted: 7/6/2001 8:38:04 PM EDT
I'm gonna break my own rule and post before reading the whole thread. Firearms are sanctified in my eyes by our constitution. Drugs are not. Think about this... you wanna trust your 6 to some asshole tripping his ass off? I don't Drugs affect the users logic train and perception of reality. Yeah things make so much sense now, lets go screw with how I see it. Sorry... got no room for that crap....
Link Posted: 7/6/2001 9:25:31 PM EDT
Originally Posted By garandman: LT - 1. Public second hand cigarete smoke - at a public place, like a ball park or a restaurant or a street corner, second hand smoke "harms" me. Sorry - outlaw it. Do what you want in your home, but don't spray your death cloud over me. Or I will make a swap with you - your smoke on me, my urine on you. Deal????
View Quote
"Second Hand Smoke" YADAYADAYADA! There is todate no evidence of SHS being harmful to anyone. If you allow the liberal liars to get away with the SHS thesis then you will allow the ban, or heavily tax, ammo because it harms the enviroment thesis. Hey your charcoal BBQ is a death cloud machine! You are polluting nature with your weed and feed spray.
Link Posted: 7/6/2001 10:27:56 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Avtomat:
whats a ligitimate business? buy and use at your own risk. abolish the IRS do all products have to be regulated? so some shmoe can sue a buisness because he hurt his own health by his choice. screw'em
View Quote
Lets say you buy an AR-15. The morons who built it (we won't name companies) were negligent in its design and manufacture. They failed to act as a reasonable person the firearm's manufacture. You go out to the range, and it blows up on the first shot, peeling your face back. Under your argument, you have no recourse, as you assumed the risk. Fortunatly, defective product law (or even basic tort law, for that matter) offers more relief. It's just like cases where prescription drugs turn people's teeth yellow or cause birth defects, firestone tires, ford pinto's, E. coli in beef, etc etc etc. When a manufacturer turns out crack cocaine, and someone is injured by it, I submit to you that person will sue the hell out of the maker and win the legal lottery. Thus persons who sell crack rock in the legalized drug paradise will have to be persons who do not fear tort liability (lawsuits). No stores or businesses would dare sell it. Undoubtably, those persons would be the same criminal element selling such now. Drugs would be sold for human consumption. If you sell a product for such, it must be safe. Now that's not the same as a person consuming a product that wasn't meant to be consumed and thus being injured. If you suggest that should not be, then we will have to overhaul our entire tort law, and that, I submit to you, is far less likely than the legalization of drugs.
View Quote
yes but the act of shooting that AR or eating that beef u know its not gonna hurt u. Smoking is extremy bad for u but people do it anyway and i have no problem with that. as long as they take responisbilty for it. as much i would love to end the war on drugs i know it will not happen until we change out soicietys out look on personly responsiblity our society today seems to be slipping fast into a socuetyu of eyah i knew i shouldnt have done it but F*ck u they should have stopped me so im gona sue.
Link Posted: 7/6/2001 10:36:22 PM EDT
Originally Posted By FedGunner: I'm gonna break my own rule and post before reading the whole thread. Firearms are sanctified in my eyes by our constitution. Drugs are not. Think about this... you wanna trust your 6 to some asshole tripping his ass off? I don't Drugs affect the users logic train and perception of reality. Yeah things make so much sense now, lets go screw with how I see it. Sorry... got no room for that crap....
View Quote
sorry but im gonna have to argue with u here on that "life liberty and the pursuit of happyness" if doing drugs make ya happy and your harming no one other then your self why the hell should i care
Link Posted: 7/6/2001 11:25:02 PM EDT
The War On Drugs is a PRETEXT for WAR Against the People. A Pretext, a purpose or motive alleged or an appearance assumed in order to cloak the real intention or state of affairs. ^ [url]www.RKBA.org/antis/hci-master[/url] [url]http://www.digitalangel.net/da/tech.htm[/url] Never Again, Never Forget Seek the Truth Liberate Your Mind FIXED BAYONETS VX
Link Posted: 7/6/2001 11:36:41 PM EDT
what did drugs/drug users ever do to you?
View Quote
Drugs have done a lot to me, I've been there in the drug "scene" I used to hang with that kind of crowd when I was younger. I (thankfully) never did any of the hard drugs but I've seen what it does to people, and now, some of my old friends are dead, some are in prison and some are near-vegetables. I'm not particularly proud of that part of my past, but I think I'm stronger for it now. Drugs don't hold any "cool" mystique for me. I know what they do. And yes, pot and a couple of others are "soft", but to say its OK for people to do meth is dangerous for lots of people, not just he users. Many of these drugs cause people to behave in dangerous, even murderous ways. (I've seen it happen)
Link Posted: 7/7/2001 12:19:39 AM EDT
so true i drink a lot less beacuse its easyer to get pot and i don't smoke cuz its too expenvive.
Link Posted: 7/7/2001 12:39:14 AM EDT
"When the smack begins to flow Then I really don't care any more About all you Jim-Jims in this town And everybody putting everybody else down And all the politicians making crazy sounds And all the dead bodies piled up in mounds..." L Reed---1966 Not much has changed in the last 35 years...
Link Posted: 7/7/2001 5:10:11 AM EDT
Some of us should consider what is cause and what is the affect. Sixtus, If you knew if you killed someone while drunk, that you would die, would you continue to drink and drive?
Link Posted: 7/7/2001 5:13:20 AM EDT
yes but the act of shooting that AR or eating that beef u know its not gonna hurt u. Smoking is extremy bad for u but people do it anyway and i have no problem with that. as long as they take responisbilty for it.
View Quote
And the cigarette companies are losing billions in lawsuits. Every product put into the market has an implied warranty it won't kill you. If you create a product that you *know* could hurt someone, you are just making the judgment larger. Such drug products will be a field day for trial lawyers. Yes, on some hypothetical, rhetorical level about freedom and all you think people should take personal responsibility, but in the real world, (ie not the world of make believe) such drug manufacturers will get the shit sued out of them. Drug makers will be charged with the responsibility because they trying to make a profit.
Link Posted: 7/7/2001 5:49:37 AM EDT
Link Posted: 7/7/2001 6:05:44 AM EDT
Link Posted: 7/7/2001 7:33:31 AM EDT
inuhbad nailed it exactly. Survival of the fitest makes the society better. So legalize the damn dope and it'll be farely cheap therefore all the dopeheads will do tons more and hopefully die off much quicker. Maybe there will be a place in town where you could drive your kids through and they could see all the halfdead dopeheads laying in the street ditches. BTW Hangfire, Jesus turning water into wine was his first miracle. You couldn't get nice clean water back then like you can now; not that Jesus wouldn't drink the wine nowadays, I personally think he would being how he knew that it helped the body in limited amounts. and that is also why he gave it to the masses. cigarettes kill 63000 people a year that have never smoked. Don't give me no shit about SHS. Also cigarettes kill 1200 people a day but 3000 people start smoking a day. yes I have very good resources. be cool about fire safety nnciderr out
Link Posted: 7/7/2001 8:01:16 AM EDT
What about the freedom to drive any speed you want? nnciderr out
Top Top