Putting people in jail for what they are choosing to do to themselves is not smart, just, proper, or deserving of obedience.
and even then, that is not what lies at the heart of these laws.
they were created in part to villify people not because of their drug choices, but because of their race and social standing....and they are still serving that purpose.
in addition, they were created to stifle free and fair trade, which is yet another unjust use of laws.
Your intrpretation can be applied by anyone to any law.
 How do you mean? Where are the people who are debating whether laws against stealing and murder and rape are just?  Whatever it is you're trying to say there, take murder and explain what you mean. Show how it's comparable, or whatever it is you are claiming. I do not believe that my arguments against the drug war (or the logic behind them) could be used by me or anyone to correctly counter "any law", or explain why any law is not proper and just.
How about this: a law should serve to stop, correct, or punish an identifiable wrongdeed.  (And beyond just the "wrongdeed" of breaking the law itself. That's circular logic.)  Is there anything wrong with that statement? Is that a fair test for a law? (I'm thinking about it myself.)  Or do you just believe that laws should not need to stand up to test or examination? That they should just be accepted as handed down, without question?
Do you feel the same way about the folks who ran the Underground Railroad, Rick?
I don't think the possession of drugs and the possession of slaves are comparable. But those that assisted in the underground railroad had to face the consequences of their actions just like those that possess illegal drugs today.
We're talking about laws that lose their moral force due to the fact that they do not pass the tests of just and moral laws. There are millions of people that disagree with you. That is why it is hard to change those laws through democratic means. There has been no guarantee that a democratic society or a republic is going to have "moral laws."Â You simply have the right to participate in the system and to strive to make the law moral in your eyes.
in addition, they were created to stifle free and fair trade, which is yet another unjust use of laws. Last time I looked Congress had a right to regulate commerce.
Or do you just believe that laws should not need to stand up to test or examination? That they should just be accepted as handed down, without question? No one believes. You are allowed to participate in your government. If you can convince the public to go along fine. If you can't you either obey the law or pay the consequences.
Hey crabby, Bodine's poorly repressed desire for homosexual domination has left him addled and sad. Come to Canada, and enjoy our anarchist society's gleeful devotion to cheap, plentiful and powerful Cannabis, along with an assortment of many other fun drugs.
By the way Jethro, I'd like to personally thank you and all your like-minded friends for keeping drugs illegal. My home province exports more than Ten Billion US dollarsin illegal drugs to the US every year, making it a bigger industry than mining, forestry, and oil combined.
Your repressive laws are putting many of our children through university, and buying our capitalist entreprenuers yachts and summer homes. Bless you for your continued support of our drug economy.
By the way Jethro, I'd like to personally thank you and all your like-minded friends for keeping drugs illegal. My home province exports more than Ten Billion US dollarsin illegal drugs to the US every year, making it a bigger industry than mining, forestry, and oil combined.I have thought for a long time Canada was not a friend of the US. You have just provided more proof of that.
you says laws should be obeyed, regardless. No I didn't. You added the regardless. In a democratic society you obey the laws becuase you have at least the opportunity to participate. But the result would be the same for Saddam's Iraq or s democracy if you don't follow the law be prepared to pay the price. The price was just a lot higher in Iraq.
the cost of legalized drugs would be huge.
no, it wouldn't. I knew you'd deny it. But there would be lots of costs.
Canada is a friend of the US. We're friends with everyone except those whose hearts are filled with hate.
So, so much hate.
But, by denying the drugs your fellow Americans so sincerely desire, you are giving us price supports like you wouldn't believe. Hell, a friend of mine was whining that his brand new Bell Jet-Ranger was confiscated last month, and he'd have to buy another one, his third in four years.
Ha ha ha, you'll never be able to afford a new car, much less a helicopter! Thanks for the money, you poor, hate-filled man.
Again you insult people who suffered under Jim Crow laws by equating them with people who are inconvenienced because they can't buy legal pot.
inconvienced?
try imprisioned.
"Nearly one in four persons (23.7%) imprisoned in the United States is currently imprisoned for a drug offense. The number of persons behind bars for drug offenses (458,131) is roughly the same as the entire prison and jail population in 1980 (474,368)."
Although African Americans comprise only 12.2 percent of the population and 13 percent of drug users,they make up 38 percent of those arrested for drug offenses and 59 percent of those convicted of drug offenses.
Jim Crow reference #'s 37 and 38. Blacks make up 38% of those arrested for drug offenses. Yeah so? Obviously they're breaking the law at a disproportionate rate.
Canada is a friend of the US. We're friends with everyone except those whose hearts are filled with hate. Your avatar indicates to me you are filled with hate, Beast.
But, by denying the drugs your fellow Americans so sincerely desire, you are giving us price supports like you wouldn't believe. That you want to help people destroy themselves for the sake of greed, that tells a lot about you.
Ha ha ha, you'll never be able to afford a new car, much less a helicopter! Thanks for the money, you poor, hate-filled man. I do hate some, I'll admit it. But I hate people like you because it is people like you that are a source of a lot of the problems of your fellow man.
the fact is, while drug use is mostly consistant (higher among America indian and Alaskan native, lower among asian) across race (for all protical purposes the same among blacks and whites), the drug laws are not enforced that way.
the laws were racist in their inception and the laws continue to be used this way.
"Do you feel the same way about the folks who ran the Underground Railroad, Rick?"
Unsupportable, selfish and insulting to people who actually had to endure that.
so, you believe all laws are just by simple fact that they are just?
a free man has an obligation to violate unjust laws.
didn't we just go invade a country to free them from the unjust rule of their own laws?
and even then, that is not what lies at the heart of these laws.
they were created in part to villify people not because of their drug choices, but because of their race and social standing....and they are still serving that purpose.
in addition, they were created to stifle free and fair trade, which is yet another unjust use of laws.
"We're talking about laws that lose their moral force due to the fact that they do not pass the tests of just and moral laws."
No everything that is immoral is illegal. Not everything that is moral is legal.
Your intrpretation can be applied by anyone to any law.
"I don't break laws, I make laws. My law."
you should brush up on your tapdancing
Your intrpretation can be applied by anyone to any law.
Â
How do you mean? Where are the people who are debating whether laws against stealing and murder and rape are just?
Â
Whatever it is you're trying to say there, take murder and explain what you mean. Show how it's comparable, or whatever it is you are claiming. I do not believe that my arguments against the drug war (or the logic behind them)Â could be used by me or anyone to correctly counter "any law", or explain why any law is not proper and just.
How about this: a law should serve to stop, correct, or punish an identifiable wrongdeed.
Â
(And beyond just the "wrongdeed" of breaking the law itself. That's circular logic.)
Â
Is there anything wrong with that statement? Is that a fair test for a law? (I'm thinking about it myself.)
Â
Or do you just believe that laws should not need to stand up to test or examination? That they should just be accepted as handed down, without question?
notice that all these things are actions against another person.
the simple possession of a substance is not an action, nor is the ingestion of a substance an action against another person.
crabs talks about disrespect for the drug laws. i know he has no respect for them but millions of americans do.
Do you feel the same way about the folks who ran the Underground Railroad, Rick?
I don't think the possession of drugs and the possession of slaves are comparable. But those that assisted in the underground railroad had to face the consequences of their actions just like those that possess illegal drugs today.
a free man has an obligation to violate unjust laws.
and he needs to expect to pay the costs.
didn't we just go invade a country to free them from the unjust rule of their own laws?
There was democratic rule in Iraq? Really? The Iraqis had a mechanism to rule themselves? That's news to me.
We're talking about laws that lose their moral force due to the fact that they do not pass the tests of just and moral laws. There are millions of people that disagree with you. That is why it is hard to change those laws through democratic means. There has been no guarantee that a democratic society or a republic is going to have "moral laws."Â You simply have the right to participate in the system and to strive to make the law moral in your eyes.
Â
Â
in addition, they were created to stifle free and fair trade, which is yet another unjust use of laws. Last time I looked Congress had a right to regulate commerce.
Â
Or do you just believe that laws should not need to stand up to test or examination? That they should just be accepted as handed down, without question? No one believes. You are allowed to participate in your government. If you can convince the public to go along fine. If you can't you either obey the law or pay the consequences.
the simple possession of a substance is not an action, nor is the ingestion of a substance
Yes it is. You have to take action to possess the drug and to ingest you also have to take an action.
there was law in Iraq.
don't you respect law?
nor is the ingestion of a substance an action against another person.
nice edit. how dishonest of you.
you have failed entirely to address what was said.
the cost of the drug war is huge.
"there was law in Iraq."
There was actually law and order.
Saddam made the laws and gave the orders.
Hey crabby, Bodine's poorly repressed desire for homosexual domination has left him addled and sad. Come to Canada, and enjoy our anarchist society's gleeful devotion to cheap, plentiful and powerful Cannabis, along with an assortment of many other fun drugs.
By the way Jethro, I'd like to personally thank you and all your like-minded friends for keeping drugs illegal. My home province exports more than Ten Billion US dollarsin illegal drugs to the US every year, making it a bigger industry than mining, forestry, and oil combined.
Your repressive laws are putting many of our children through university, and buying our capitalist entreprenuers yachts and summer homes. Bless you for your continued support of our drug economy.
It comes right down to the old, ironic line from the TV show, Baretta, Crabs.
"Don't do the crime, if you can't do the time."
do you have any idea how many people have done "illegal" drugs and not done time?
disrespect for the law.
add to that the way the drug laws are more like "don't do the crime, if you are black and can't do the crime", and the laws are an ugly farce.
and bodine says they should be obeyed.
"disrespect for the law. "
A law is just a law.
People are disrespectful.
there was law in Iraq. No there was not. There was just force.
the cost of the drug war is huge. the cost of legalized drugs would be huge. But you'll ignore that cost.
By the way Jethro, I'd like to personally thank you and all your like-minded friends for keeping drugs illegal. My home province exports more than Ten Billion US dollarsin illegal drugs to the US every year, making it a bigger industry than mining, forestry, and oil combined.I have thought for a long time Canada was not a friend of the US. You have just provided more proof of that.
and bodine says they should be obeyed.
No I didn't. But then I don't expect any honest response from you. It is people like that make it hard for democracies and republics to work.
so, Jim Crow laws were just?
you says laws should be obeyed, regardless.
no, it wouldn't.
it would be profitable.
Again you insult people who suffered under Jim Crow laws by equating them with people who are inconvenienced because they can't buy legal pot.
You are petulent and narcessistic. It's a pathetic combination, Crabs.
you says laws should be obeyed, regardless. No I didn't. You added the regardless. In a democratic society you obey the laws becuase you have at least the opportunity to participate. But the result would be the same for Saddam's Iraq or s democracy if you don't follow the law be prepared to pay the price. The price was just a lot higher in Iraq.
no, it wouldn't. I knew you'd deny it. But there would be lots of costs.
You are petulent and narcessistic. It's a pathetic combination, Crabs.
Â
Well, afterall, he is a liberal democrat, Rick.
Uhhhh, no jethro.
Canada is a friend of the US. We're friends with everyone except those whose hearts are filled with hate.
So, so much hate.
But, by denying the drugs your fellow Americans so sincerely desire, you are giving us price supports like you wouldn't believe. Hell, a friend of mine was whining that his brand new Bell Jet-Ranger was confiscated last month, and he'd have to buy another one, his third in four years.
Ha ha ha, you'll never be able to afford a new car, much less a helicopter! Thanks for the money, you poor, hate-filled man.
inconvienced?
try imprisioned.
as for equating them with Jim Crow laws...
while we also give Canada price supports...it should be noted that the drug laws create a huge cash flow for terrorists.
Jim Crow reference #'s 37 and 38. Blacks make up 38% of those arrested for drug offenses. Yeah so? Obviously they're breaking the law at a disproportionate rate.
"Quit talking to me crabgrass" - Torpedo-8
"Although African Americans comprise only 12.2 percent of the population and 13 percent of drug users
Uhhhh, no jethro.
I didn't think you'd agree!!!!
Canada is a friend of the US. We're friends with everyone except those whose hearts are filled with hate. Your avatar indicates to me you are filled with hate, Beast.
But, by denying the drugs your fellow Americans so sincerely desire, you are giving us price supports like you wouldn't believe. That you want to help people destroy themselves for the sake of greed, that tells a lot about you.
Ha ha ha, you'll never be able to afford a new car, much less a helicopter! Thanks for the money, you poor, hate-filled man. I do hate some, I'll admit it. But I hate people like you because it is people like you that are a source of a lot of the problems of your fellow man.
Although African Americans comprise only 12.2 percent of the population and 13 percent of drug users
I don't know if the 13% is a valid number. Probably something you pulled out of a bodily orifice.
the fact is, while drug use is mostly consistant (higher among America indian and Alaskan native, lower among asian) across race (for all protical purposes the same among blacks and whites), the drug laws are not enforced that way.
the laws were racist in their inception and the laws continue to be used this way.
I admit it. I'll never be able to afford a helicopter.
Whoopee.
Oh, but my car is paid for, and I bought it new.
There, I feel better about myself now.