1
   

Support the War on Drugs ?

 
 
Reply Thu 7 Dec, 2006 12:20 am
Government in the USA
was established by the permission
of its citizens, to defend their rights
from violation by others;
NOT to prevent a citizen
from exercising poor judgment,
insofar as his OWN interests r concerned.

In other words,
it was the Founders' filosofy
that each citizen had the right
to do whatever he whatever he damn pleased,
so long as he did not violate the rights of others.


Government 's War on Drugs
exists only by USURPATION.

As a libertarian citizen,
I don 't support that war,
altho I deem addictive narcotics to be poisonous,
destructive substances that a man of wisdom wud avoid.

Comments ?

David
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 888 • Replies: 16
No top replies

 
Miller
 
  1  
Reply Thu 7 Dec, 2006 08:41 am
What's the issue here? Are you for POT?
0 Replies
 
au1929
 
  1  
Reply Thu 7 Dec, 2006 08:53 am
Support the war on drugs. How by using them more frequently? Razz
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Thu 7 Dec, 2006 05:57 pm
Miller wrote:
Quote:
What's the issue here?

The issue is the absence of jurisdiction
in government to have any influence
upon what any American citizen
chooses to ingest,
and government 's running hog wild
in grabbing jurisdiction to do so,
that does not rightfully belong to it;
( like a dishonest bank teller who grabs
some of your funds, when no one is looking ).


Quote:

Are you for POT?

No.
Sucking in dirt is not a good idea,
in my opinion; government by usurpation
is a WORSE idea.
David
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Thu 7 Dec, 2006 05:58 pm
au1929 wrote:
Support the war on drugs.

How by using them more frequently? Razz

How does the logic of that work ?
0 Replies
 
gustavratzenhofer
 
  1  
Reply Thu 7 Dec, 2006 06:00 pm
I THINK THE GOVERNMENT SHOULD SUPPLY ALL CITIZENS WITH DRUGS.

I BELIEVE A STONED COUNTRY WOULD BE A GOOD ONE.

I HAVE NO ANALOGIES TO USE AT THE PRESENT TIME.
0 Replies
 
au1929
 
  1  
Reply Thu 7 Dec, 2006 06:02 pm
OmSigDAVID wrote:
au1929 wrote:
Support the war on drugs.

How by using them more frequently? Razz

How does the logic of that work ?



That was a joke son. Just a joke Laughing Laughing
0 Replies
 
au1929
 
  1  
Reply Thu 7 Dec, 2006 06:06 pm
The fact is there is too much money to be made to ever be able to fight the drug trade effectively.
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Thu 7 Dec, 2006 10:43 pm
gustavratzenhofer wrote:
I THINK THE GOVERNMENT SHOULD SUPPLY ALL CITIZENS WITH DRUGS.

I BELIEVE A STONED COUNTRY WOULD BE A GOOD ONE.

I HAVE NO ANALOGIES TO USE AT THE PRESENT TIME.

Will u get some in the future ?
0 Replies
 
rosborne979
 
  1  
Reply Thu 7 Dec, 2006 10:44 pm
au1929 wrote:
The fact is there is too much money to be made to ever be able to fight the drug trade effectively.


The harder the government makes it to get drugs, the more valuable they will become. The war on drugs is creating many more problems than it is solving.
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Fri 8 Dec, 2006 07:55 pm
rosborne979 wrote:
au1929 wrote:
The fact is there is too much money to be made to ever be able to fight the drug trade effectively.


Quote:
The harder the government makes it to get drugs,
the more valuable they will become.

The war on drugs is creating many more problems than it is solving.

Yes.
The innumerable victims of criminal violence
since dangerous, addictive narcotics were outlawed,
owe their injuries to GOVERNMENT price supports
for those narcotics, such as to put them out of the reach
of their customers, without recourse to crime.

How many innocent citizens ( 100s of 1000s ? millions ? )
have been sacrificed, by THEIR government
on the alter of stopping people from using poor judgment
as to their own best interests. I remember Nixon 's anti-drug speech on TV:
" We will not have a generation of slaves " as if people who
chose to addict themselves were going to forget about it,
because government made it against the law
( after STEALING the jurisdiction to do it ).
David
0 Replies
 
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Fri 8 Dec, 2006 07:59 pm
The money making is on both sides of the issue, including prison building.

I am philosophically opposed to the war on drugs, prohibition, etc. - but the system is well entrenched now. Hard to just say no to it and have the complex system just stop.
0 Replies
 
rosborne979
 
  1  
Reply Fri 8 Dec, 2006 10:57 pm
ossobuco wrote:
The money making is on both sides of the issue, including prison building.

I am philosophically opposed to the war on drugs, prohibition, etc. - but the system is well entrenched now. Hard to just say no to it and have the complex system just stop.


Actually, I disagree. The war on drugs is one of the few wars we can actually win. We CAN just stop it, with the smallest flourish of a pen, it will deflate itself and vanish.

Most wars result from human needs, economic, religious and emotional. But the war on drugs is one of the few wars founded on legislation. And not just any legislation, but a restriction of personal freedom. Some would say that we are trying to prevent people from harming themselves, but not only is our attempt at prevention failing, but we are corrupting the most basic value of life in the process; personal freedom. Yes, it's the freedom to commit suicide, and some people don't like that, but I think it's a freedom that a mature civilization will have to come to grips with.
0 Replies
 
candidone1
 
  1  
Reply Sun 10 Dec, 2006 02:37 am
I believe that before we support anything so grand as a national or internatinal policy on narcotics, we should all encourage David to spell correctly and to use a standard font.

I would likely read more of his posts if it weren't so laborious.
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Mon 11 Dec, 2006 05:22 am
candidone1 wrote:
I believe that before we support anything so grand as a national or internatinal policy on narcotics, we should all encourage David to spell correctly and to use a standard font.

I would likely read more of his posts if it weren't so laborious.

I am ALREADY spelling correctly.
The rest of u r spelling rong.

U honor the anti-logical, non-fonetic paradime.
Shame on u.

Do it right.


I also support full fontal freedom.
David
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Mon 11 Dec, 2006 05:30 am
candidone1 wrote:
I believe that before we support anything so grand as a national or internatinal policy on narcotics, we should all encourage David to spell correctly and to use a standard font.

I would likely read more of his posts if it weren't so laborious.

What is laborious about it ?
David
0 Replies
 
Xenoche
 
  1  
Reply Sun 17 Dec, 2006 11:10 pm
Nothing is Labourious about it, candidone1 is just being nit picky.
I hate these bloody spelling/font NAZIS. They seem to squirm into every thread at some stage.


"Fontal freedom" Awsome Laughing

The war on drugs is a joke. Next thing ya know the casual pot smoker is labeled as an enemy combatant and sent to 1 of the many sinister FEMA prison camps dot-ing the american landscape.

Freedom is a dream, not a reality.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

How can we be sure? - Discussion by Raishu-tensho
Proof of nonexistence of free will - Discussion by litewave
Destroy My Belief System, Please! - Discussion by Thomas
Star Wars in Philosophy. - Discussion by Logicus
Existence of Everything. - Discussion by Logicus
Is it better to be feared or loved? - Discussion by Black King
Paradigm shifts - Question by Cyracuz
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Support the War on Drugs ?
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.06 seconds on 04/25/2024 at 03:56:20