They want free dope, open borders, and never believe in going to war.


I swear, they are DU with guns.  Just call yourself liberals and be done with it guys!

You're not fooling anyone!


Sgtar15


PS  I am sure this doesn't apply to all libertarians, but it sure seems that way.....

My sociology professor, I think, is a libertarian.

Guy has way too much tinfoil on, though.

Well, it's a fun rant, but it really doesn't apply.  From this Libertarian to you, though, thanks for playing!

Since most liberals are for big governent, how do you suppose that Libertarians = Liberals w/guns?

Ayn Rand’s Q&A on Libertarians

Q: What do you think of the Libertarian Party? [FHF: “A Nation’s Unity,” 1972]

AR: I’d rather vote for Bob Hope, the Marx Brothers, or Jerry Lewis. I don’t think they’re as funny as Professor Hospers and the Libertarian Party. If, at a time like this, John Hospers takes ten votes away from Nixon (which I doubt he’ll do), it would be a moral crime. I don’t care about Nixon, and I care even less about Hospers. But this is no time to engage in publicity seeking, which all these crank political parties are doing. If you want to spread your ideas, do it through education. But don’t run for President—or even dogcatcher—if you’re going to help McGovern.

www.aynrand.org/site/PageServer?pagename=education_campus_libertarians

2004: History repeating itself.

Lies!

I don't want free dope, I'm willing to pay for it if I want it. I'm just not willing to pay to incarcerate everybody who chooses to partake.

I don't want open borders. I, like Badnarik, want the borders controlled. I want background and security checks on legal immigration and illegals treated as invaders, just like Badnarik.

I know there is a time and place for war, that's just a silly statement.

Quoted: They want free dope, open borders, and never believe in going to war. I swear, they are DU with guns.  Just call yourself liberals and be done with it guys! You're not fooling anyone! Sgtar15 PS  I am sure this doesn't apply to all libertarians, but it sure seems that way.....

Free dope? You gotta pay for your drugs or else your a free loader.
Open borders, no not really. Letting people come over if they do it by the laws. Sure why not my grandparents did.
Um, hmmm. Not going to war. Not sure about that.

Not really, they want to eliminate welfare and many regulations on business as well. They are socially liberal, generally speaking.

Let's not forget the fact that they are for Gay Marriage, Pro-Abortion and support allowing homosexuals to openly serve in the military.

Libertarians - The name is only half right!

Quoted: Not really, they want to eliminate welfare and many regulations on business as well. They are socially liberal, generally speaking.

Social issues are where we need conservative values the most! Nations can rebound from economic decline, but destruction of the social and moral fabric is an incurable ill!

Quoted: They want free dope, open borders, and never believe in going to war.

Ah, your glaring lack of knowledge and ability to trivialize the complex is quite refreshing.  

This is hilarious.  People on the left call Libertarians "Republicans who smoke weed".

Quoted: Ayn Rand’s Q&A on Libertarians Q: What do you think of the Libertarian Party? [FHF: “A Nation’s Unity,” 1972] AR: I’d rather vote for Bob Hope, the Marx Brothers, or Jerry Lewis. I don’t think they’re as funny as Professor Hospers and the Libertarian Party. If, at a time like this, John Hospers takes ten votes away from Nixon (which I doubt he’ll do), it would be a moral crime. I don’t care about Nixon, and I care even less about Hospers. But this is no time to engage in publicity seeking, which all these crank political parties are doing. If you want to spread your ideas, do it through education. But don’t run for President—or even dogcatcher—if you’re going to help McGovern. www.aynrand.org/site/PageServer?pagename=education_campus_libertarians 2004: History repeating itself.

saved for an email when I get home

Quoted: Quoted: They want free dope, open borders, and never believe in going to war. Ah, your glaring lack of knowledge and ability to trivialize the complex is quite refreshing.

Legalize Dope:

"It's time to re-legalize drugs and let people take responsibility for themselves. Drug abuse is a tragedy and a sickness. Criminal laws only drive the problem underground and put money in the pockets of the criminal class. With drugs legal, compassionate people could do more to educate and rehabilitate drug users who seek help. Drugs should be legal. Individuals have the right to decide for themselves what to put in their bodies, so long as they take responsibility for their actions."

www.lp.org/issues/relegalize.html

Open Borders:

"The Libertarian Party has long recognized the importance of allowing free and open immigration, understanding that this leads to a growing and more prosperous America. We condemn the xenophobic immigrant bashing that would build a wall around the United States. At the same time, we recognize that the right to enter the United States does not include the right to economic entitlements such as welfare. The freedom to immigrate is a freedom of opportunity, not a guarantee of a handout."

www.lp.org/issues/foreign-policy.html

No War:

We call for the reform of the Presidential War Powers Act to end the President's power to initiate military action, and for the abrogation of all Presidential declarations of "states of emergency." There must be no further secret commitments and unilateral acts of military intervention by the Executive Branch.


www.lp.org/issues/platform/platform_all.html#preswarp

You were saying something about being uninformed?

Quoted: Let's not forget the fact that they are for Gay Marriage, Pro-Abortion and support allowing homosexuals to openly serve in the military. Libertarians - The name is only half right!

It's not that they want those things, it's that they don't think the Federal Governement has any business meddling in them.

Libertarians are on the other end of the spectrum from the socialist, commie, liberals.

"They want free dope, open borders, and never believe in going to war."

Yes, free dope is nice. But good luck getting it free. Open boarders?.....fuck that. Close them down. One of the reasons I'm NOT voting for Bush is that he is giving amnesty to all the fucking illeagals that are already here, and the ones that are still coming accros every day. And for going to war....kill them all, and let no thing be left alive. That is what war is about....killing everything that moves.

"Let's not forget the fact that they are for Gay Marriage, Pro-Abortion and support allowing homosexuals to openly serve in the military. "

Fuck gay marriage, they can fuck themselves all they want in the ass, or whatever they do. I'm not willing to let them have the same benefits I have because they want equal rights. If they were equal they would have been born the other sex. (And let it be known that I have gay friends).

I'm not really pro-abortion (I've paid for 2) , but I am for a womans right to chose what is best for herself. If the gov takes away one individual womans right to chose what she wants for her own body, future, or health, what is to stop the gov from limiting your freedom of choice in what is sacred to you. To me nothing is more sacred than your own body, and NO ONE will tell me what I can and can not do with it.

Homos in the military are fine with me just as long as they can do the job that they enlisted for.

"Social issues are where we need conservative values the most! Nations can rebound from economic decline, but destruction of the social and moral fabric is an incurable ill!"

I totally agree with this statement. It is the liberal socialist views that are ruining this country from the inside out, and the elite mass media that is spoon feeding thier shit and fear into American homes every night on TV.




That being said.......I'll stop now

Quoted: Quoted: Let's not forget the fact that they are for Gay Marriage, Pro-Abortion and support allowing homosexuals to openly serve in the military. Libertarians - The name is only half right! It's not that they want those things, it's that they don't think the Federal Governement has any business meddling in them.

Same thing.


SGatr15

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: They want free dope, open borders, and never believe in going to war. Ah, your glaring lack of knowledge and ability to trivialize the complex is quite refreshing.   Legalize Dope: "It's time to re-legalize drugs and let people take responsibility for themselves. Drug abuse is a tragedy and a sickness. Criminal laws only drive the problem underground and put money in the pockets of the criminal class. With drugs legal, compassionate people could do more to educate and rehabilitate drug users who seek help. Drugs should be legal. Individuals have the right to decide for themselves what to put in their bodies, so long as they take responsibility for their actions." www.lp.org/issues/relegalize.html Open Borders: "The Libertarian Party has long recognized the importance of allowing free and open immigration, understanding that this leads to a growing and more prosperous America. We condemn the xenophobic immigrant bashing that would build a wall around the United States. At the same time, we recognize that the right to enter the United States does not include the right to economic entitlements such as welfare. The freedom to immigrate is a freedom of opportunity, not a guarantee of a handout." www.lp.org/issues/foreign-policy.html No War: We call for the reform of the Presidential War Powers Act to end the President's power to initiate military action, and for the abrogation of all Presidential declarations of "states of emergency." There must be no further secret commitments and unilateral acts of military intervention by the Executive Branch. www.lp.org/issues/platform/platform_all.html#preswarp You were saying something about being uninformed?

Yes I don't see a problem with drugs, can you drink? Let people do some crack if they really want to also I have no problem with some one putting a gun to their head and pulling the trigger.

I don't Drink or smoke or do any drugs, simply because its a fucking waste.

Quoted: Yes I don't see a problem with drugs, can you drink? Let people do some crack if they really want to also I have no problem with some one putting a gun to their head and pulling the trigger. I don't Drink or smoke or do any drugs, simply because its a fucking waste.

You know those apocalyptic zombie movies we are all so fond of, the ones where throngs of the undead walk the streets praying on the living? Well, legalize drugs and replace the zombies with crack and heroine addicts and that's what you'll have.

BTW...Any libertarian who honestly believes that the criminal empires that have made billions and billions of dollars on the illegal global drug trade will just curl up and die if the US legalizes drugs, is completely out of their mind! The drug cartels will continue business as usual, which means killing their competition. The management of any corporation attempting to compete with the international drug cartels for the drug market would become instant targets for assassination, and illegal dangerous unregulated drugs would continue to flood the streets of America. It's just plain stupid to think otherwise!

Quoted: Quoted: Yes I don't see a problem with drugs, can you drink? Let people do some crack if they really want to also I have no problem with some one putting a gun to their head and pulling the trigger. I don't Drink or smoke or do any drugs, simply because its a fucking waste. You know those apocalyptic zombie movies we are all so fond of, the ones where throngs of the undead walk the streets praying on the living? Well, legalize drugs and replace the zombies with crack and heroine addicts and that's what you'll have. BTW...Any libertarian who honestly believes that the criminal empires that have made billions and billions of dollars on the illegal global drug trade will just curl up and die if the US legalizes drugs, is completely out of their mind! The drug cartels will continue business as usual, which means killing their competition. The management of any corporation attempting to compete with the international drug cartels for the drug market would become instant targets for assassination, and illegal dangerous unregulated drugs would continue to flood the streets of America. It's just plain stupid to think otherwise!

No see those crack heads running around now have become criminals just as if a drunk was to go outside. Do it in your own home but don't fuck with my life.

And making it legal wont cause more crack heads. Not sure how many druggies you have known but laws don't bother them.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Yes I don't see a problem with drugs, can you drink? Let people do some crack if they really want to also I have no problem with some one putting a gun to their head and pulling the trigger. I don't Drink or smoke or do any drugs, simply because its a fucking waste. You know those apocalyptic zombie movies we are all so fond of, the ones where throngs of the undead walk the streets praying on the living? Well, legalize drugs and replace the zombies with crack and heroine addicts and that's what you'll have. BTW...Any libertarian who honestly believes that the criminal empires that have made billions and billions of dollars on the illegal global drug trade will just curl up and die if the US legalizes drugs, is completely out of their mind! The drug cartels will continue business as usual, which means killing their competition. The management of any corporation attempting to compete with the international drug cartels for the drug market would become instant targets for assassination, and illegal dangerous unregulated drugs would continue to flood the streets of America. It's just plain stupid to think otherwise! No see those crack heads running around now have become criminals just as if a drunk was to go outside. Do it in your own home but don't fuck with my life.

They don't have their own homes. They use abandon houses, public restrooms, and back alleys to get high in. They can't hold down jobs, so they resort to robbery, burglary and theft to get money for their drugs. That is where they start prowling the streets looking for people to rob.

And making it legal wont cause more crack heads. Not sure how many druggies you have known but laws don't bother them.

I don't know any druggies at all, but I know lots and lots of people who stay away from drugs simply becuase the getting caught can ruin your life. Think about it, if you fail a piss test, then you lose your job. If you get arrested with drugs, then you can lose your job, your freedom and alot of other things. Remove that threat and all of the sudden drugs become nothing more than a good harmless fun, especially for teenagers and young people.

Quoted: Libertarians are on the other end of the spectrum from the socialist, commie, liberals. "They want free dope, open borders, and never believe in going to war." Yes, free dope is nice. But good luck getting it free. Open boarders?.....fuck that. Close them down. One of the reasons I'm NOT voting for Bush is that he is giving amnesty to all the fucking illeagals that are already here, and the ones that are still coming accros every day Noone's getting any amnesty. Proposed and shot down. And for going to war....kill them all, and let no thing be left alive. That is what war is about....killing everything that moves. No, that is not. War is about winning, not genocide. There are still things moving in all the places we have fought wars before "Let's not forget the fact that they are for Gay Marriage, Pro-Abortion and support allowing homosexuals to openly serve in the military. " Fuck gay marriage, they can fuck themselves all they want in the ass, or whatever they do. I'm not willing to let them have the same benefits I have because they want equal rights. If they were equal they would have been born the other sex. (And let it be known that I have gay friends). I'm not really pro-abortion (I've paid for 2) , but I am for a womans right to chose what is best for herself. If the gov takes away one individual womans right to chose what she wants for her own body, future, or health, what is to stop the gov from limiting your freedom of choice in what is sacred to you. To me nothing is more sacred than your own body, and NO ONE will tell me what I can and can not do with it. To many of us, the Constitution does not provide that right, Roe was a fallacy, and it should be left to the states Homos in the military are fine with me just as long as they can do the job that they enlisted for. "Social issues are where we need conservative values the most! Nations can rebound from economic decline, but destruction of the social and moral fabric is an incurable ill!" I totally agree with this statement. It is the liberal socialist views that are ruining this country from the inside out, and the elite mass media that is spoon feeding thier shit and fear into American homes every night on TV. That being said.......I'll stop now

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: They want free dope, open borders, and never believe in going to war. Ah, your glaring lack of knowledge and ability to trivialize the complex is quite refreshing.   Legalize Dope: "It's time to re-legalize drugs and let people take responsibility for themselves. Drug abuse is a tragedy and a sickness. Criminal laws only drive the problem underground and put money in the pockets of the criminal class. With drugs legal, compassionate people could do more to educate and rehabilitate drug users who seek help. Drugs should be legal. Individuals have the right to decide for themselves what to put in their bodies, so long as they take responsibility for their actions." www.lp.org/issues/relegalize.html Open Borders: "The Libertarian Party has long recognized the importance of allowing free and open immigration, understanding that this leads to a growing and more prosperous America. We condemn the xenophobic immigrant bashing that would build a wall around the United States. At the same time, we recognize that the right to enter the United States does not include the right to economic entitlements such as welfare. The freedom to immigrate is a freedom of opportunity, not a guarantee of a handout." www.lp.org/issues/foreign-policy.html No War: We call for the reform of the Presidential War Powers Act to end the President's power to initiate military action, and for the abrogation of all Presidential declarations of "states of emergency." There must be no further secret commitments and unilateral acts of military intervention by the Executive Branch. www.lp.org/issues/platform/platform_all.html#preswarp You were saying something about being uninformed? Yes I don't see a problem with drugs, can you drink? Let people do some crack if they really want to also I have no problem with some one putting a gun to their head and pulling the trigger. I don't Drink or smoke or do any drugs, simply because its a fucking waste.

'responsible people'
'compassionate people'

Bah...

Libertarians is as sadly misinformed about human nature as Communists were...

People are selfish, greedy bastards by nature, and in most cases not responsible enough to be trusted with the amount of liberty the LP would give them...

Freedom w/o Responsibility = Anarchy

I'm not really pro-abortion (I've paid for 2)

And the stupidist statement of the year award goes to...................


You sure you don't work for Kerry?


Sgatr15

Quoted: I'm not really pro-abortion (I've paid for 2) And the stupidist statement of the year award goes to................... You sure you don't work for Kerry? Sgatr15

Quoted: "Social issues are where we need conservative values the most! Nations can rebound from economic decline, but destruction of the social and moral fabric is an incurable ill!" I totally agree with this statement. It is the liberal socialist views that are ruining this country from the inside out, and the elite mass media that is spoon feeding thier shit and fear into American homes every night on TV. That being said.......I'll stop now

Liberal socialist support abortion and gay rights in the military.  Two of the points that you also agree with. So...........who is damaging what again?


Sgatr15

Quoted: They want free dope, open borders, and never believe in going to war. I swear, they are DU with guns.  Just call yourself liberals and be done with it guys! You're not fooling anyone! Sgtar15 PS  I am sure this doesn't apply to all libertarians, but it sure seems that way.....

You're just baiting me or whoever.

DU?  I'm not sure exactly what you are talking about, but is there some kind of rival anti-gun website or something?  

Anyways, I'm a rationalist.  You need to define your terms:  Jefferson was a liberal in his day.  Concealed carry laws are "liberal" laws--they apply equally to all.  Some of liberalism is good, the opposite would be tyrannical.  You may be cnofusing liberal with Marxist or far left or something.


Legal drugs:  Do you own your own body?

Open borders:  Do you have the freedom to travel and associate freely or is some state controlling you?

War:  Never solved any problems, only got lots of people killed.  That doesn't mean defense is unimportant, it just meets maybe $500B is too much for "defense."  Talk about addiction!

You know those apocalyptic zombie movies we are all so fond of, the ones where throngs of the undead walk the streets praying on the living? Well, legalize drugs and replace the zombies with crack and heroine addicts and that's what you'll have.

That is hilarious!  You sound like the VPC people who say things like "if right to carry becomes law, you will have blood flowing in the streets."

It's a crappy, tired, and wholly debunked utilitarian argument.


When is the last time you saw to competing beer delivery truck drivers shooting it out over "turf"?  When drugs become legal, legitimate businessmen will have legal means of settling their disputes.  OPEC is a cartel and they don't solve their disputes with violence.

Libertarians is as sadly misinformed about human nature as Communists were... People are selfish, greedy bastards by nature, and in most cases not responsible enough to be trusted with the amount of liberty the LP would give them... Freedom w/o Responsibility = Anarchy

Why?  Anarcho-capitalism depends on self-interest.  That's why it works!

Freedom w/o responsiblity = libertine, that's LIBERTINE.  Look it up.  Anarchy means civilization w/o central government.  

You guys with the "if drugs were legal there'd be nothing but drug addicts" line kill me. I'm so sure ANYBODY would be like "oh shit, heroins legal, well this is the moment I've been waiting for!" People who don't use heroin or crack or PCP aren't going to run out and start now simply because they can. How many people do you know that can drink but don't? How many people do you know that can smoke cigarettes but don't because they know it's harmful?

As to the cartels still running things.....well so what? So some Colombians will make contracts with Wal Mart and Wal Greens to sell the cocaine? Guess what? BFD? Will they still be killing eachother in COLOMBIA? Why do I care?

What you won't have is the street gangs pushing on every corner because no one is going to be buying on the corner. It will make America just about as filthy as Holland. What else you won't have is overcrowded prisons where real criminals get off with a slap on the wrist because there wasn't room for them. And you won't be paying for useless alphabet agencies to try and enforce unenforcable laws. If you think laws stop crack heads or junkies from using, you're obviously a little naieve.


The bottom line is this. If you believe laws don't prevent violence or gun crime, you can't speak out the other side of your mouth and say they prevent drug use. If laws don't prevent crime they don't prevent crime, period. If someone robs to feed their habit they can be tried for robbery just like the guy who shot someone can be tried for murder. It has nothing do do with drugs just like it has nothing to do with guns. Some people are scumbags and some aren't. No amount of stealing my tax dollars to fight a farce of a "war on drugs" will change that. If it's not hurting anybody it's not a crime and when they cross that line they get punished.

conservatives carp about small government, but but addend this statement with exception after exception.  the problem is that enough exceptions abrogate the rule.  you merely want a different kind of big government, and are therefore the mirror image of liberals.

at least the libertarian platform is internally consistent:  smell government=small government.

Quoted: Legal drugs:  Do you own your own body?

Consumption of drugs is not the only issue:

1. It is a known fact that many drugs like cocaine, PCP, Methamphetamine and LSD can cause you to enter a highly aggresive delusional state which is known to lead to paranoia and violence.

2. It is a known fact that drug use and drug trafficing lead to higher crime rates. Drug users turn to crime in order to procure money to pay for their drugs, and drug dealers use violent crimes (extortion, murder, blackmail, kidnappping) to protect and expand their drug terrority.

3. It is a known and proven fact that the funds from international drug trafficing are often times used to fund international terrorism.

Drugs, drug trafficing and drug use present an overwhelming and unaccecptable danger to society and in some ways even threaten the existence of our nation.

Open borders:  Do you have the freedom to travel and associate freely or is some state controlling you?

You are not able to travel to any other nation on the face of this earth without the permission of their government. Even Canada and Mexico reserve the right to forbid you enterance to their country, and they do not have unrestricted travel or immigration policies. The current uncontrolled influx of illegal and legal aliens has resulted in increased crime, increased poverty levels, the degradation of our social moral fabric and acts of international terrorism against the United States.

War:  Never solved any problems, only got lots of people killed.  That doesn't mean defense is unimportant, it just meets maybe $500B is too much for "defense."  Talk about addiction!

I guess the Imperial expansion of the German Nazi empire and the Japanese Empire during WW2 didn't really qualify as a problem in your opinion. I guess the sensless slaughter of 6 million Jews didn't really count as a problem in your opinion. I guess the expansion of tyranical communist governments through out the world doesn't really count as a problem in your opinion. I guess that the Taliban Government's support of international terrorist groups that repeatedly attacked the United States doesn't really count as a problem in your opinion. I guess that the invasion of Kuwait by Iraq and murder of it's citizens doesn't really count as a problem in your opinion.

You libertarians are just plain stupid!

You know those apocalyptic zombie movies we are all so fond of, the ones where throngs of the undead walk the streets praying on the living? Well, legalize drugs and replace the zombies with crack and heroine addicts and that's what you'll have.

That is hilarious!  You sound like the VPC people who say things like "if right to carry becomes law, you will have blood flowing in the streets." It's a crappy, tired, and wholly debunked utilitarian argument. When is the last time you saw to competing beer delivery truck drivers shooting it out over "turf"?  When drugs become legal, legitimate businessmen will have legal means of settling their disputes.  OPEC is a cartel and they don't solve their disputes with violence.

You're obviously a complete moron:

1. During prohibition, the gangs that imported and distributed alchol were not the manufacturers of that alchohol. The alchohol was manufactured legally by forgein companies mainly in Canada. When prohibition was repealed, the legal industries simply moved their operations back to their original locations and resumed business as usual. The manufacture, importation and distribution of narcotics is an illegal operation from start to finish. There are no legal manufacturers to fill the void.

2. The previous illegal distributors and importers of illegal booze continued their illegal bloodthirsty business practices after prohibition was lifted. They simply switched to drugs.

3. You cannot compare my stance on drugs to the VPC's stance on Guns. There is no constitutional amendment explicitly protecting your right to take drugs. There is a constitutional amendment protecting your right to own and carry firearms.

Quoted: 2. The previous illegal distributors and importers of illegal booze continued their illegal bloodthirsty business practices after prohibition was lifted. They simply switched to drugs.

Yet somehow you still don't get it? Why don't you read what you JUST TYPED?!?!
The illegal importers continued their illegal business with a new illegal substance. Wow, I'm noticing the word illegal here alot. So if we legalized drugs....they would move on to? Cuban Cigars? Running firecrackers between wyoming and Colorado? what?

Why do you suppose they made that switch?? No business for the CRIMINALS when it became LEGAL?
Or are you just saying that people who are bloodthirsty criminals will continue to be so no matter what? Gee, I guess in that case we'll have to outlaw bloodthirsty criminals....

Quoted: Quoted: 2. The previous illegal distributors and importers of illegal booze continued their illegal bloodthirsty business practices after prohibition was lifted. They simply switched to drugs. Yet somehow you still don't get it? Why don't you read what you JUST TYPED?!?! The illegal importers continued their illegal business with a new illegal substance. Wow, I'm noticing the word illegal here alot. So if we legalized drugs....they would move on to? Cuban Cigars? Running firecrackers between wyoming and Colorado? what? Why do you suppose they made that switch?? No business for the CRIMINALS when it became LEGAL?

So you're saying that the international drug cartels, the Mafia, the street gangs, the motorcycle gangs and the streetcorner drug peddlers are just going to role over and let companies like Bayer, Upjohn, and Dow cut them out of the mix?

What I am saying is that you can legalize whatever you want, but there is only one way to conduct the drug trade, and there is only one infrastructure for conducting the drug trade. The people distributing and manufacturing the illegal drugs are going to continue business as usual, which is murder, deciet and mixing deadly substances into their drugs. You are just removing the ability to get the violent criminals off of the street for selling or possesing their poison.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: 2. The previous illegal distributors and importers of illegal booze continued their illegal bloodthirsty business practices after prohibition was lifted. They simply switched to drugs. Yet somehow you still don't get it? Why don't you read what you JUST TYPED?!?! The illegal importers continued their illegal business with a new illegal substance. Wow, I'm noticing the word illegal here alot. So if we legalized drugs....they would move on to? Cuban Cigars? Running firecrackers between wyoming and Colorado? what? Why do you suppose they made that switch?? No business for the CRIMINALS when it became LEGAL? So you're saying that the international drug cartels, the Mafia, the street gangs, the motorcycle gangs and the streetcorner drug peddlers are just going to role over and let companies like Bayer, Upjohn, and Dow cut them out of the mix?

Well yes, because they would make more at taco bell. The quality would be 100x, risk will be far less. Prices will be lower alot lower.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: 2. The previous illegal distributors and importers of illegal booze continued their illegal bloodthirsty business practices after prohibition was lifted. They simply switched to drugs. Yet somehow you still don't get it? Why don't you read what you JUST TYPED?!?! The illegal importers continued their illegal business with a new illegal substance. Wow, I'm noticing the word illegal here alot. So if we legalized drugs....they would move on to? Cuban Cigars? Running firecrackers between wyoming and Colorado? what? Why do you suppose they made that switch?? No business for the CRIMINALS when it became LEGAL? So you're saying that the international drug cartels, the Mafia, the street gangs, the motorcycle gangs and the streetcorner drug peddlers are just going to role over and let companies like Bayer, Upjohn, and Dow cut them out of the mix? Well yes, because they would make more at taco bell. The quality would be 100x, risk will be far less. Prices will be lower alot lower.

Ah, so you think that the prices for a regualted, quality controlled product which is manufactured in fixed facility, probably by union workers and distributed and sold through legal distribution channels is lower than an uncontrolled, unregulated product which is essentially manufactured by slave labor and distributed on the black market.

Take a business management course next semester!

Ill have to type this quickly as Im in class right now...

Fuck Repubs, fuck Democrats, fuck parties in general-  they keep individuals from achieving as a group.  

George Washington-

"The common and continual mischiefs of the spirit of party are sufficient to make it the interest and duty of a wise people to discourage and restrain it."

"and warn you in the most solemn manner against the baneful effects of the spirit of party, generally."


I'm pro country, individual choice, and freedom.  If you wanna do drugs, fine.  You want an abortion, fine.  you wanna cross our border illegally- fine, try it.

the president's power to send troops, along with emergency powers, etc, needs to revoked immediately.  we have not had a war since WW2.  all others were conflicts as there were never formal declarations of war.

and anyone who says that war never solves anything is full of shit.  war has solved all major conflicts since time was time.

Unfortunately, the Republican party is closest to my beliefs and my vote will actually count.

Quoted: This is hilarious.  People on the left call Libertarians "Republicans who smoke weed".

I guess the old saying "You know you are right when EVERYONE hates you" applies.

Quoted: Quoted: This is hilarious.  People on the left call Libertarians "Republicans who smoke weed". I guess the old saying "You know you are right when EVERYONE hates you" applies.

I don't hate libertarians. If they had a snowballs chance in hell of ever going anywhere I might hate libertarians. Since they have no hope of ever becoming a serious contender for national offices I have no interest in them other than debunking their misguided hair brained platform on internet chat forums!

Quoted: I don't hate libertarians. If they had a snowballs chance in hell of ever going anywhere I might hate libertarians. Since they have no hope of ever becoming a serious contender for national offices I have no interest in them other than debunking their misguided hair brained platform on internet chat forums!

My problem with Libertartians is that they are just short of being anarchists.

Their "ain't noboby gonna tell me what to do..EVER..." mentality is damaging to society and pollyannish in terms of running a nation.

AND they got guns....

motown_steve:

You should really rethink your position here.  The illicit drug dealers have a lot more costs than legitimate drug companies.  They lose large amounts of shipments because of busts, or it gets dumped in the ocean while running from the Coast Guard.

They also make things in smaller, less economic batches.  Major drug companies can make virtually any drug in pill form for a penny a pill, don't have to worry about major portions of inventory being seized by customs, or being ripped off and shot by their distributors.

Illegal drugs cost more because of the risks people take to bring them to market.  Remove those risks and the cost goes down.  Maybe you should have paid more attention in business class.

If these bloodthirsty criminals are so intent on making money selling things that are bad for us, why don't they sell homemade hooch, or their own brand of handmade cigarettes?  They only have the opportunity to make this stuff because the illegality of the product deters legitimate companies from competing.  Fewer producers = less competition = higher prices and profits.

Also look at it from the consumer standpoint:  If you have an affinity for heroin (approximately the same % of the population is addicted to heroin now as 100 years ago when heroin was legal), where would you rather buy the smack-o-the-day? At your local drug store, made by a well known company and purity is guaranteed, or travel to the seedy, crime-ridden area of town where you are as likely to get stabbed as make a successful buy?

People get into selling illegal goods because the profit margin is higher than legal business, because not as many people are willing to compete with you.  Those that do are willing to take the extra risks needed to compete in an illegal market.

It's simple economics, yet the "drugs are bad" mantra blinds too many people to see the true nature of how it works.

oh, dear,  this one is rich...

Quoted: 2. It is a known fact that drug use and drug trafficing lead to higher crime rates. Drug users turn to crime in order to procure money to pay for their drugs, and drug dealers use violent crimes (extortion, murder, blackmail, kidnappping) to protect and expand their drug terrority.

completely bogus reasoning.  perhaps you should consider the meaning of "known fact".  cite me an example of non-illegal drugs that cause the above.  you can't.  are you aware that caffeine is more potent and addictive than cocaine?  that is actually a known fact, meaning that it is scientifically verifiable, and does not depend on other factors.  how about valium?  ephidrine?  nicotine?  xenadrine?  codeine?  percocet?  vicodin?  tylenol PM?  nyquil?  budweiser?  these are all drugs.  now, is it a known fact that...

budweiser use and budweiser trafficking leads to higher crime rates.  bud users turn to crime in order to pay for their budweiser, and budweiser dealers use violent crimes to protect and expand their budweiser territory?

according to your original statement, this is a known fact.  try encarta sometime.

3. It is a known and proven fact that the funds from international drug trafficing are often times used to fund international terrorism.

the same can be said for arms dealers.  thank you for trying to make a case against our ARs, 1911s, and .22s.

Drugs, drug trafficing and drug use present an overwhelming and unaccecptable danger to society and in some ways even threaten the existence of our nation.

your feinstein-like reasoning and rhetoric is noted.

1. During prohibition, the gangs that imported and distributed alchol were not the manufacturers of that alchohol. The alchohol was manufactured legally by forgein companies mainly in Canada. When prohibition was repealed, the legal industries simply moved their operations back to their original locations and resumed business as usual. The manufacture, importation and distribution of narcotics is an illegal operation from start to finish. There are no legal manufacturers to fill the void.

if you, for one moment, believe that drug manufacture is universally condemned by all nations and their governments, then...

You're obviously a complete moron

and last, but certainly not least, the following coup de grace.

3. You cannot compare my stance on drugs to the VPC's stance on Guns. There is no constitutional amendment explicitly protecting your right to take drugs. There is a constitutional amendment protecting your right to own and carry firearms.

we are talking about something larger than the constitution.  we are talking about liberty.  not in a modified or politically expedient sense of the word.  we are talking about actual freedom.  the freedom to choose.  to decide.  to bring up our children in the way they should go, so that when they are old they will not depart from it.  

freedom is not the absence of danger, or fear.  to be a man, any child must stand, face, and defeat these.  freedom is not comfort, and neither is it safety.  freedom is not restriction placed upon an adversary, but rather the disencumbering of one's own strength.

freedom is not the ability to daydream peacefully in a meadow.  it is the responsibility to stand at the foot of the mountain, and choose our own way up.  to walk along the precipice, and guide our own steps.  

freedom, sir, is not the couch upon which we recline.  it is the burden we must carry if we are to call ourselves men.

and if that mountain is too high for you, or that burden too heavy, then surrender meekly into the arms of your mother government, and let those of us who remain carry your part for you.



i'm sure that you'd be welcomed in cuba.

[edit: tags]

Just so you know, MOST OF US HERE ARE LIBERALS.

It just so happens that in the mid-20th century, the LEFT stole the term from us and used it to mean Progressive/proto-socialist/proto-communist


edited to add 1:  Sarge, why do you always have to start this crap?

edited to add 2: SteyrAUG hit it right on the money.  You think our borders aren't WIDE FREAKING OPEN RIGHT NOW?  You think our Marines are being allowed to do their job properly?    

Quoted: But personally I'd rather start heading down the road to greater freedom and liberty (even with the potholes) than stay on the current one which leads to disaster for individual freedom.

Well stated!  I remember just a couple years ago … About this time of year … We were all Americans. Too bad the political parties have us all ready to kill each other because our beliefs may diverge from our neighbors and friends on a couple of minor issues.

Quoted: ...we are talking about something larger than the constitution.  we are talking about liberty.  not in a modified or politically expedient sense of the word.  we are talking about actual freedom.  the freedom to choose.  to decide.  to bring up our children in the way they should go, so that when they are old they will not depart from it.   freedom is not the absence of danger, or fear.  to be a man, any child must stand, face, and defeat these.  freedom is not comfort, and neither is it safety.  freedom is not restriction placed upon an adversary, but rather the disencumbering of one's own strength. freedom is not the ability to daydream peacefully in a meadow.  it is the responsibility to stand at the foot of the mountain, and choose our own way up.  to walk along the precipice, and guide our own steps.   freedom, sir, is not the couch upon which we recline.  it is the burden we must carry if we are to call ourselves men. and if that mountain is too high for you, or that burden too heavy, then surrender meekly into the arms of your mother government, and let those of us who remain carry your part for you.

Very well said, Sirensong.

It is simply amazing to me how someone can rightly ridicule the illogical, emotionally based Leftist arguments for gun control...
..and then turn right around and use those exact same liberal rants to support drug control.

Troll or doofus? You decide.  

Quoted: oh, dear,  this one is rich... Quoted: 2. It is a known fact that drug use and drug trafficing lead to higher crime rates. Drug users turn to crime in order to procure money to pay for their drugs, and drug dealers use violent crimes (extortion, murder, blackmail, kidnappping) to protect and expand their drug terrority. are you aware that caffeine is more potent and addictive than cocaine?  that is actually a known fact, meaning that it is scientifically verifiable, and does not depend on other factors.  how about valium?  ephidrine?  nicotine?  xenadrine?  codeine?  percocet?  vicodin?  tylenol PM?  nyquil?  budweiser?  these are all drugs.  now, is it a known fact that...

Are you stupid enough to attempt to compare the delusion inducing effects of Cocaine, PCP or Meth Amphedamine with any of the drugs you listed?

budweiser use and budweiser trafficking leads to higher crime rates.  bud users turn to crime in order to pay for their budweiser, and budweiser dealers use violent crimes to protect and expand their budweiser territory? according to your original statement, this is a known fact.  try encarta sometime.

Are you denying the fact that drug trafficing and drug sales have led to explosions of violent crime and gang warfare in the inner cities of this nation? If so, I invite you to come to Detroit sometime. I will show you neighborhoods run by gangs of drug trafficers.

3. It is a known and proven fact that the funds from international drug trafficing are often times used to fund international terrorism. the same can be said for arms dealers.  thank you for trying to make a case against our ARs, 1911s, and .22s.

Do you deny that the poppy growers in Afghanistan and the opium use the proceeds of their drug trafficing to fund international terrorists?

How much of Bushmaster's or Colt's profits go to fund international terrorism? I can't believe that you would post a statement like

thank you for trying to make a case against our ARs, 1911s, and .22s.

for people to read!

Drugs, drug trafficing and drug use present an overwhelming and unaccecptable danger to society and in some ways even threaten the existence of our nation. your feinstein-like reasoning and rhetoric is noted.

You don't have a constitutional or moral freedom to use drugs. I'm sorry if you feel that is oppresive.

1. During prohibition, the gangs that imported and distributed alchol were not the manufacturers of that alchohol. The alchohol was manufactured legally by forgein companies mainly in Canada. When prohibition was repealed, the legal industries simply moved their operations back to their original locations and resumed business as usual. The manufacture, importation and distribution of narcotics is an illegal operation from start to finish. There are no legal manufacturers to fill the void. if you, for one moment, believe that drug manufacture is universally condemned by all nations and their governments, then...

You are obviously a complete moron

No, the Taliban was all for drug production. It was one of the few industries that they allowed!

and last, but certainly not least, the following coup de grace. 3. You cannot compare my stance on drugs to the VPC's stance on Guns. There is no constitutional amendment explicitly protecting your right to take drugs. There is a constitutional amendment protecting your right to own and carry firearms. we are talking about something larger than the constitution.  we are talking about liberty.  not in a modified or politically expedient sense of the word.  we are talking about actual freedom.  the freedom to choose.  to decide.  to bring up our children in the way they should go, so that when they are old they will not depart from it.

I find it completely laughable that you would use the word of God to try and justify opening the flood gates of illegal narcotics!

freedom is not the absence of danger, or fear.  to be a man, any child must stand, face, and defeat these.  freedom is not comfort, and neither is it safety.  freedom is not restriction placed upon an adversary, but rather the disencumbering of one's own strength. freedom is not the ability to daydream peacefully in a meadow.  it is the responsibility to stand at the foot of the mountain, and choose our own way up.  to walk along the precipice, and guide our own steps.   freedom, sir, is not the couch upon which we recline.  it is the burden we must carry if we are to call ourselves men. and if that mountain is too high for you, or that burden too heavy, then surrender meekly into the arms of your mother government, and let those of us who remain carry your part for you.

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,"

The meaning of this paragraph is threefold sir!

1. All people have a god given right to live, be free and pursue happiness
2. It is the role of government to protect these rights from those who would rob us of them
3. The people determine which steps and which restricions government is allowed to enact to protect those rights!

Freedom and Liberty never were and never will be absolute in this nation! Thomas Jefferson and all of the founding fathers new this to be true. They also knew that the restrictions necessary to ensure our freedom would walk a fine line between liberty and tyranny. In the end, the faith was left in the people to determine which liberties and which restrictions are reasonable.

ETA... This is also why the founding fathers made certian specific rights off limits to government restriction in the US constitution by adding the bill of rights!

The people of this nation overwhelmingly agree that restrictions on certain drugs are accecptable and necessary to ensure the life, liberty and pursuit of happiness for all!

i'm sure that you'd be welcomed in cuba.

You have no understanding of the foundations of your own country!

Quoted: we are talking about something larger than the constitution.  we are talking about liberty.  not in a modified or politically expedient sense of the word.  we are talking about actual freedom.  the freedom to choose.  to decide.  to bring up our children in the way they should go, so that when they are old they will not depart from it.

Since you decided to quote from the Bible my friend, please allow me to add some bible verses to your political mindset:

Taxes -

Matthew 22:21 - They say unto him, Caesar's. Then saith he unto them, Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and unto God the things that are God's.

Romans 13:6-7 - For for this cause pay ye tribute also: for they are God's ministers, attending continually upon this very thing. Render therefore to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute [is due]; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honour to whom honour.

Social Welfare -

Acts 2:45 - And sold their possessions and goods, and parted them to all [men], as every man had need.

1 Timothy 5:8 - But if any provide not for his own, and specially for those of his own house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel.

Role of Government -

Romans 13:1-5 - Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God. Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation. For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same: For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to [execute] wrath upon him that doeth evil. Wherefore [ye] must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake.

Quoted: motown_steve: You should really rethink your position here.  The illicit drug dealers have a lot more costs than legitimate drug companies.  They lose large amounts of shipments because of busts, or it gets dumped in the ocean while running from the Coast Guard. They also make things in smaller, less economic batches.  Major drug companies can make virtually any drug in pill form for a penny a pill, don't have to worry about major portions of inventory being seized by customs, or being ripped off and shot by their distributors.

Then why are we constantly hearing that the drug companies are loosing money hand over fist? Why are prescrition drug prices so far out of control in this country that the government has to supplement drug costs by taxpayer funded programs?

Illegal drugs cost more because of the risks people take to bring them to market.  Remove those risks and the cost goes down.  Maybe you should have paid more attention in business class.

What is the cost of a crack rock? $5? What is the cost of a Viagra?

If these bloodthirsty criminals are so intent on making money selling things that are bad for us, why don't they sell homemade hooch, or their own brand of handmade cigarettes?  They only have the opportunity to make this stuff because the illegality of the product deters legitimate companies from competing.  Fewer producers = less competition = higher prices and profits.

Heroine and cocaine are often times "cut" with the same stuff that goes into flourescent tubes!

Also look at it from the consumer standpoint:  If you have an affinity for heroin (approximately the same % of the population is addicted to heroin now as 100 years ago when heroin was legal), where would you rather buy the smack-o-the-day? At your local drug store, made by a well known company and purity is guaranteed, or travel to the seedy, crime-ridden area of town where you are as likely to get stabbed as make a successful buy?

That would depend on whether or not you had the money to buy the quality drug store brand name heroine, or if you only could afford the cheap dangerous black market heroine. Maybe if you stick a few people up, or steal a few VCR's to pawn you'd have more money for the good stuff.

People get into selling illegal goods because the profit margin is higher than legal business, because not as many people are willing to compete with you.  Those that do are willing to take the extra risks needed to compete in an illegal market. It's simple economics, yet the "drugs are bad" mantra blinds too many people to see the true nature of how it works.

You have to add the inherent violenece and murder that go hand in hand with the drug trade to economics. Pablo Escobar built his empire on murder, fear and violence. Today, Comlumbia is a nation that is almost completely in the hands of the Drug Cartels. The Government is basically terrified to go against them!

Your logic is ridiculous at best. You cite business classes, but overlook the most prevalent factor in business. Supply and demand. Right now demand is high and supply is low. When the supply exceeds the demand prices drop. And that's right accross the board for any product. The only time black market goods are below cost is when those goods are stolen. Would you like to try and dispute that? You are making statments about cartels running our streets, but those aren't cartels. Those are penny ante Crips and Bloods and whatever other little gangs. And just because every city has them doesn't mean they're all affiliated, they aren't. That's just a convenient way to label the gang for your specific neighborhood. They might sling rock on the corner or dime bags of weed but they are far from a cartel. Dealing black market drugs is just a convenient way to boost their income. You're worried about the robberies and murders and shit that go with it, that aint the addicts, that's the dealers. The same people out there slinging crack are the ones pulling home invasions and armed robberies. Drugs are just part of their racket. The average street level addict is working some shit fast food job or doing day labor. You might think you know how it all works because you have an apartment that overlooks the shitty part of town where all this goes down 5 miles away, I lived there. And I'm here to tell you you've got know idea how black markets or gangs work. None at all. You just have a preconceived notion of how it looks in the hollywood movie that fits your notion that drugs cause all these problems.

Now, that's not to say drugs aren't a problem. They are, but drug use isn't something that's going to be legislated out of existance. That can only be accomplished by higher social moral standards and education. Raising our kids instead of throwing them into day cares and public schools with these same wolves you're talking about. The problem is that you aint teaching your kids about drugs, the dealers are. However, we CAN get rid of the wolves (dealers) by taking away at least that part of their business. They aint gonna stand on the corner and sell crack any more than they stand on the corner and sell vodka and smokes now. Your own logic dictates that, you just refuse to see it. And no one here is likening the gun control versus drug control argument on a constitutional level. They're arguing it as a CONCEPT. When it comes to the concept it is the same. When something is logical and makes sense it makes sense unilaterally for like items/circumstances. The biggest example is saying "murder is already illegal, and if someone wants to do it they will." In other words, you don't cite the weapon used, you cite the actual crime. Murder. Well guess what, robbery is already illegal too, so it doesn't really matter if the guy was high on drugs or not, or if he was stealing to support a habit.  And if he was, it just goes to show that YOUR legislation that we all pay for isn't working. If it was we wouldn't be having this discussion would we? Just like alcohol prohibition didn't stop drinking, and actually expanded it, so does prohibition of other controlled substances. The only thing that makes it different is your desire for it to be so. Do you promote personal accountability?  If so, that begins with freedom. Freedom to makes mistakes and have natural consequences like dying of an OD or getting Hep C. The threat of going to prison just reinforces the behavior and teaches them to not get CAUGHT. Drug use has it's own consequences that speak for themselves. Why insulate users from those natural consequences and simultaneously fill the prisons with possesion of drug crimes instead of those that actually prey on others? THAT is what people are likening the argument to. Just like guns. (false) Security or Freedom. Please choose ONE and deposit your ballot.

One last note as well. You keep citing cartels in South America. That's Cocaine production. You think POOR people do cocaine? The most dedicated thief couldn't steal enough in a month to support a strong habit for a day. I've known alot of coke heads and I have never met a poor one yet. They might be "poor" but it's from blowing their $70,000 salary on coke. They're scumbags to be sure, but they aren't those inner city people you think they are.