Jump to content

Obama


deepak

Recommended Posts

I guess iffy or not, they seem pretty important to me. You take them out of the loop, and I'm willing to bet you'd see a drop in drug smuggling via cars from Mexico.

This is all well above my pay grade, but it seems like you can't just go in and make sweeping changes without severe consequences. I really dont want to present myself as 'clued in', because I'm not, but thats just my overall impression. I guess I'll just say that most of what I've heard him say gives me great pause.

It's not like there's any shortage of drugs in this country. But drugs would be legal if RP had his way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 126
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Well we haven't cured cancer or Alzheimer's yet. Lets send those GSK scientists home.

Good comparison. We've locked up people for doing something that only harms themselves. The flow of drugs hasn't stopped, and criminals get money and power. Just like with prohibition was successful in the 20s. I see how that's comparable to medical research. Ass.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

lol

I think the 'its not going well' mentality is just a cop out for responsibility. But it sure would be easier to make everything legal. As far as 'only harming themselves'...tell that to the parents of children who have overdosed. Tell that to the people who die from fire and asphyxiation from the tenant below them who had a meth lab explosion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

lol

I think the 'its not going well' mentality is just a cop out for responsibility. But it sure would be easier to make everything legal.

Are drugs worse than the drug smugglers and drug gangs? I don't think so. But more than that, I don't think it's the job of the government to decide if people do drugs, have sex, or do anything else that doesn't impact anyone else.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yah, next we'll have to legalize prostitution and gambling and stick to crimes where people aren't just hurting themselves. And if our cops and courts aren't overwhelmed with drug criminals, they'll be able to go after murderers, rapists, and thieves.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think at some point you have to balance lack of moralizing with adequate protection, even if that means the addition of moralization. A society with no rules is a society in chaos, as far as I'm concerned. I don't see making drugs illegal as radical. There are far more radical things in life. I think its a reasonable compromise.

If the government isn't here to protect, than what the hell are they good for?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Making drugs illegal wasn't radical. It was racist. Because it was the blacks doing drugs when drugs were first made illegal. It was also to protect domestic synthetic rope makers against the external hemp rope makers. And the paper industry. It became a fund raising opportunity for police departments and prisons. And protected intoxicants as being the realm of big tobacco and the alcohol industry, while protecting the medical pharmas from self medication. So yah, not radical.

The result is immoral. The result of the drug war is a police state, rampant drug gangs, "gateway drugs", meth lab toxic impacts, etc. The war on drugs doesn't benefit the people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i think you are hysterically moralizing, even if you don't realize you are doing it. a truly free society can not allow its government to regulate the bodies and minds of the citizens. the citizens should rule the government, not the other way around. i thought we had a pursuit of happiness thing, here?

I think those are points too many governments worldwide miss. I'm not pro-drugs by any means, but moralizing on such matters doesn't really seem any different to me than religious laws of the past or modern copyright/patent law.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Functional government is impossible when all of your citizens are goddamn stupid. They'll either vote stupid people into office that make stupid decisions or be stupid and overthrow a good government for stupid reasons, because they're stupid and have no foresight, or ability to think about the whole instead of themselves. On average we're "more intelligent" than the average person from a few centuries ago, but all of that raw material is wasted, it seems. I'd expand on this but I'm stupid and need to think about it more.

So, yeah. Which candidates support eugenics, retard holocaust, isolationism, self-sufficient economy, birthing licenses, drastically reducing carbon footprint, and demoting Oregon to occupied territory?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Functional government is impossible when all of your citizens are goddamn stupid. They'll either vote stupid people into office that make stupid decisions or be stupid and overthrow a good government for stupid reasons, because they're stupid and have no foresight, or ability to think about the whole instead of themselves. On average we're "more intelligent" than the average person from a few centuries ago, but all of that raw material is wasted, it seems. I'd expand on this but I'm stupid and need to think about it more.

So, yeah. Which candidates support eugenics, retard holocaust, isolationism, self-sufficient economy, birthing licenses, drastically reducing carbon footprint, and demoting Oregon to occupied territory?

Lead by example, end yourself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

have something against Oregon?

You're actually the first person to ever point the Oregon thing out. It's an alternate version of the "6 million Jews, 1 clown" joke. Beautiful state, it is.

Lead by example, end yourself.

I don't really see how that'd help things at all. I'd get a lot more done as a serial killer. Neither option is all that appealing, however.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't really see how that'd help things at all. I'd get a lot more done as a serial killer. Neither option is all that appealing, however.

That's easy, your judgement is suspect. You'll do much more good by providing an example to the other 15 yr old elitists.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's easy, your judgement is suspect. You'll do much more good by providing an example to the other 15 yr old elitists.

Would you rather me be obsessed with boobies and Soulja Boy? I see nothing wrong with trying to understand the fucked up world around me... and striving not to be a drone, whose greatest accomplishments at age 30 are a job, a cat, and a wide-screen TV.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.