I'd have to agree. The amount of money that goes to the "war on drugs" would be far better spent on fascilities to help those with addiction problems, than spending them on the world "policing" of drugs, and the wasted money, and lives of people imprisoned like they were mass murdering monsters. The people are getting wise to it, and, hopefully, the tide will turn, as it did for the prohibition of alcohol.
While I think that some practices must remain banned, like the conning of people by means of gambling etc... I couldn't agree more on many statements you made.
For example, die you know that prostitution is perfectly legal in many European countries, like Germany, the Netherlands, etc?
Here in Germany, prostitutes are legally required to pay the same taxes into old age insurance fees health care insurances as everyone else does.
"Whatever the form of government functions, anyone entering into an arrangement with government takes the risk of having accurately ascertained that he who purports to act for the government stays within the bounds of his authority . . . and this is so even though . . . the agent himself may have been unaware of the limitations upon his authority.", Federal Crop Insurance Corp. vs. Merrill, 332 U.S. 380, 384 (1947)
Officers committed FRAUD among other things. SUE THEM!
"When jurisdiction is not squarely challenged, the subject matter is presumed to exist." Burkes vs. Laskar 441 U.S. 471
"Where jurisdiction is challenged, it must be proven." Hagans vs. Lavine, 415 U.S. 528 at 533
"Silence can only be equated with fraud where there is a legal or moral duty to speak or where an inquiry left unanswered would be intentionally misleading.", U.S. vs. Tweel, 550 F.2d. 299-300 (1977)
In my perfect world almost nothing would be illegal. Everything would however have guidelines of legality or rule about how you can or cannot do it. These guidelines would be centered around the idea that you are free until you directly affect someone who doesn't wish to be. IE. You can get high as a kite in your basement and it's legal, get behind the wheel of a car and it's illegal. You can kill somone if they legally consent, kill them when they don't want you to and your going to jail.
That's right. Except you can't smoke in the same room as a non-smoker and for radical actions (like assisted suicide) there has to be regulation (like mental capacity hearing).
Not quite, You could smoke in the same room as a nonsmoker if that rooms owner legally posts notices that they allow smoking in that room, in which case the non smoker is consenting to being around smokers by entering that room in the first place. Now a smoker could not smoke on public property like a library, park or in the street since anything Public would belong to everyone and your freedom cannot impact everyone if they don't want you too.
This is a lesson that needed to be learned as many religious leaders have signed contracts with the federal government to "assist" in situations such as martial law.
One the pastor video is fake. The guy tells you he has 11 stitches and has been beaten, head smashed into the pavement, yet has no bruises...zip. I've seen people who have been treated the way he said he was and believe me, their faces was bruised badly and a lot of swelling. Total bullshit story. As for legalizing drugs, since I don't use them, I could care less.
That' a point for sure. But I've been around drug and alcohol rehab for a long time and believe me, drugs do a lot more than harm to more that just the user. There would still be a great deal of tax money used to monitor and police those who are choosing to use who have children or elderly parents.
Drugs do more harm to more than just the user because they are illegal. Like prohibition showed us (gangsters) if drugs were legal they would be cheaper and safer and "less cool" and society would benefit.
I think your talking about pot and nothing else. In that case I guess switching the wealth from the sales of pot to the upper 10% and creating huge farms cultivated by the poor, would benefit the few. I wonder if the same farming subsidies would apply to pop farming, as it does to corn? Who really benefits from this "legalization" You think as a small farmer you would? Or a smoker? Think pots expensive now..let the gov. start taxing it.
Are you an idiot? Do you know how cheap cannabis is to produce? Taxing it is nothing compared to how much the price is affected by the illegality. If you can grow it in your own home the government cannot tax it anyway. Are you a nutjob republican that attends tea parties or something?
Besides, I'd rather the government gets money than crime syndicates. Don't you?
I don't even smoke or drink alcohol. I just find it all terribly hypocritical. Why is alcohol and tobacco legal anyway?
No, LOL, I'm not a right wing nut job. I'm just saying that if your talking about just legalizing pot. I don't have a problem with it. but if you think the powers that be will allow you to grow your own, think again. You can't grow your own tobacco or have a still. And they are legal because it's a cash cow for any tax the state or Fed want to put on it and makes a couple of hug co. very rich. This will happen with pot.
They can't make it legal and not allow you to grow your own. And cannabis is way easier to grow than tobacco. And to process. My father makes wine from the grapes around his house. He doesn't have a still but he can use one. There's no need for a permit.
It's only when you sell stuff that you have to get permits because regulatory agencies have to check the safety of your product. You can do whatever you want for personal consumption.
It's better that the government make money than drug cartels.
If the patrols had to film each person sited and the tape never stopped rolling I bet they would behave but the depravity of man shows forth when you have that much authority and can abuse it so easily. Don't expect your government to save you, The border should be turned over to the Americans living along the boarders to enforce the line. Why pay with taxes of the American people to just get beat up by those we hire to keep us safe and enforce out laws.
I'll have to think about what you're saying. My first impression is that your reasoning makes sense, but it is a utilitarian argument, and all such arguments are subject to slippery slopes.
One problem which immediately comes to mind is how to determine where to draw the line as to which laws are overturned on the basis that upholding them goes against utility. You can't just make a sweeping moral decision about a loosely defined category of laws whose reasons for existing may differ greatly.
I agree, punishment doesn't make sense when it does nothing but force an "offender" to convince people of his innocence even if he committed a crime and believes it is immoral since the severity of the punishment will be too great to justify otherwise. You must convince someone that they did violate a law (they might not believe the accusation). Next you have to convince them it is morally incorrect. For it to make sense a person would have to believe their actions are immoral and not care.
All change comes from within. I don't put that burden on the state. The State should simply focus on the security of the productive members of society. That means leaving people who are simply unproductive alone, and taking the violent people out of circulation.
Yeah, i agree to legalize these things but I'm also wary of us/government becoming dependent on revenue from them. Like cigarettes, it may promote the growth of addictions in other countries that are less developed.
I'd have to agree. The amount of money that goes to the "war on drugs" would be far better spent on fascilities to help those with addiction problems, than spending them on the world "policing" of drugs, and the wasted money, and lives of people imprisoned like they were mass murdering monsters. The people are getting wise to it, and, hopefully, the tide will turn, as it did for the prohibition of alcohol.
RichardRoy2 2 years ago
You cannot regulate or moderate what you prohibit. Regulation is law and order. Prohibition is a free-for-all.
tbrinnand 2 years ago
While I think that some practices must remain banned, like the conning of people by means of gambling etc... I couldn't agree more on many statements you made.
For example, die you know that prostitution is perfectly legal in many European countries, like Germany, the Netherlands, etc?
Here in Germany, prostitutes are legally required to pay the same taxes into old age insurance fees health care insurances as everyone else does.
Ackerland2 2 years ago
"Whatever the form of government functions, anyone entering into an arrangement with government takes the risk of having accurately ascertained that he who purports to act for the government stays within the bounds of his authority . . . and this is so even though . . . the agent himself may have been unaware of the limitations upon his authority.", Federal Crop Insurance Corp. vs. Merrill, 332 U.S. 380, 384 (1947)
Officers committed FRAUD among other things. SUE THEM!
EliyahMessageTime 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"When jurisdiction is not squarely challenged, the subject matter is presumed to exist." Burkes vs. Laskar 441 U.S. 471
"Where jurisdiction is challenged, it must be proven." Hagans vs. Lavine, 415 U.S. 528 at 533
"Silence can only be equated with fraud where there is a legal or moral duty to speak or where an inquiry left unanswered would be intentionally misleading.", U.S. vs. Tweel, 550 F.2d. 299-300 (1977)
freedom-school . com
EliyahMessageTime 2 years ago
In my perfect world almost nothing would be illegal. Everything would however have guidelines of legality or rule about how you can or cannot do it. These guidelines would be centered around the idea that you are free until you directly affect someone who doesn't wish to be. IE. You can get high as a kite in your basement and it's legal, get behind the wheel of a car and it's illegal. You can kill somone if they legally consent, kill them when they don't want you to and your going to jail.
imnoromeo 2 years ago
That's right. Except you can't smoke in the same room as a non-smoker and for radical actions (like assisted suicide) there has to be regulation (like mental capacity hearing).
komninosm 2 years ago
Not quite, You could smoke in the same room as a nonsmoker if that rooms owner legally posts notices that they allow smoking in that room, in which case the non smoker is consenting to being around smokers by entering that room in the first place. Now a smoker could not smoke on public property like a library, park or in the street since anything Public would belong to everyone and your freedom cannot impact everyone if they don't want you too.
imnoromeo 2 years ago
Yeah, that's what I meant, I was trying to be as laconic as possible mate.
komninosm 2 years ago
This is a lesson that needed to be learned as many religious leaders have signed contracts with the federal government to "assist" in situations such as martial law.
Mahoivlich 2 years ago
One the pastor video is fake. The guy tells you he has 11 stitches and has been beaten, head smashed into the pavement, yet has no bruises...zip. I've seen people who have been treated the way he said he was and believe me, their faces was bruised badly and a lot of swelling. Total bullshit story. As for legalizing drugs, since I don't use them, I could care less.
Boomer1949 2 years ago
You are paying for the PRIVATE FOR PROFIT prison system that incarcerates them.
j0hnwi11iams 2 years ago
That' a point for sure. But I've been around drug and alcohol rehab for a long time and believe me, drugs do a lot more than harm to more that just the user. There would still be a great deal of tax money used to monitor and police those who are choosing to use who have children or elderly parents.
Boomer1949 2 years ago
Drugs do more harm to more than just the user because they are illegal. Like prohibition showed us (gangsters) if drugs were legal they would be cheaper and safer and "less cool" and society would benefit.
komninosm 2 years ago
I think your talking about pot and nothing else. In that case I guess switching the wealth from the sales of pot to the upper 10% and creating huge farms cultivated by the poor, would benefit the few. I wonder if the same farming subsidies would apply to pop farming, as it does to corn? Who really benefits from this "legalization" You think as a small farmer you would? Or a smoker? Think pots expensive now..let the gov. start taxing it.
Boomer1949 2 years ago
Are you an idiot? Do you know how cheap cannabis is to produce? Taxing it is nothing compared to how much the price is affected by the illegality. If you can grow it in your own home the government cannot tax it anyway. Are you a nutjob republican that attends tea parties or something?
Besides, I'd rather the government gets money than crime syndicates. Don't you?
I don't even smoke or drink alcohol. I just find it all terribly hypocritical. Why is alcohol and tobacco legal anyway?
komninosm 2 years ago
No, LOL, I'm not a right wing nut job. I'm just saying that if your talking about just legalizing pot. I don't have a problem with it. but if you think the powers that be will allow you to grow your own, think again. You can't grow your own tobacco or have a still. And they are legal because it's a cash cow for any tax the state or Fed want to put on it and makes a couple of hug co. very rich. This will happen with pot.
Boomer1949 2 years ago
They can't make it legal and not allow you to grow your own. And cannabis is way easier to grow than tobacco. And to process. My father makes wine from the grapes around his house. He doesn't have a still but he can use one. There's no need for a permit.
It's only when you sell stuff that you have to get permits because regulatory agencies have to check the safety of your product. You can do whatever you want for personal consumption.
It's better that the government make money than drug cartels.
komninosm 2 years ago
If the patrols had to film each person sited and the tape never stopped rolling I bet they would behave but the depravity of man shows forth when you have that much authority and can abuse it so easily. Don't expect your government to save you, The border should be turned over to the Americans living along the boarders to enforce the line. Why pay with taxes of the American people to just get beat up by those we hire to keep us safe and enforce out laws.
carz1955 2 years ago
I'll have to think about what you're saying. My first impression is that your reasoning makes sense, but it is a utilitarian argument, and all such arguments are subject to slippery slopes.
One problem which immediately comes to mind is how to determine where to draw the line as to which laws are overturned on the basis that upholding them goes against utility. You can't just make a sweeping moral decision about a loosely defined category of laws whose reasons for existing may differ greatly.
Ormaaj 2 years ago
I think prison should not be used as punishment. It should be used for taking violent members out of society.
j0hnwi11iams 2 years ago
I agree, punishment doesn't make sense when it does nothing but force an "offender" to convince people of his innocence even if he committed a crime and believes it is immoral since the severity of the punishment will be too great to justify otherwise. You must convince someone that they did violate a law (they might not believe the accusation). Next you have to convince them it is morally incorrect. For it to make sense a person would have to believe their actions are immoral and not care.
Ormaaj 2 years ago
All change comes from within. I don't put that burden on the state. The State should simply focus on the security of the productive members of society. That means leaving people who are simply unproductive alone, and taking the violent people out of circulation.
j0hnwi11iams 2 years ago
legalize all the vice in society, then just tax the ass off it!
CincinnatusSPQR 2 years ago
Yeah, i agree to legalize these things but I'm also wary of us/government becoming dependent on revenue from them. Like cigarettes, it may promote the growth of addictions in other countries that are less developed.
Barklord 2 years ago
The tax should reflect the cost to society.
j0hnwi11iams 2 years ago
it's good that tobacco subsidies are ending
Barklord 2 years ago
Nice idea.
komninosm 2 years ago