Luckily, cops aren’t known to witness crimes happening so them not being armed will not be an issue.
I think police not carrying guns will provide them just the attitude adjustment we’re looking for.
[quote]snipeout wrote:
Similar damage?[/quote]
Well said.
These are apples-to-oranges comparisons because (1) the use and effects of the compared objects aren’t the same, and (2) we have made judgments that some we are ok with people doing and others we are not.
We have no interest in encouraging the use of, for example, crack cocaine and meth. The costs of widespread use of these are very high compared to other drugs. If anyone is unsure of this, ask anyone who used to be a crack or meth addict - if they are still alive.
Alcohol is subject to abuse, but that is a separate issue - empirically, alcohol abuse doesn’t match the kinds of abuse problems that harder drugs do.
Most of the “legalize it all” claptrap is coffeehouse theory that could only apply in a world of social atoms where individual decisions only generate costs to the individual making them. We know that isn’t true, no matter how much libertarian dipshittery gets spilled on the page.
Outlawing certain hard drugs creates a tax on consumption - which is exactly what a society does when it wants to discourage a particular act. Make the costs skyrocket, add punishment, make it hard to get - this is all the kit of disincentivizing the use of drugs, which is a moral good.
The usual argument against criminalization of hard drugs is that it has costs associated with it as well, but that is nothing more than Making the Perfect the Enemy of the Good. An imperfect regime that sputters and misfires is better than no regime, given what the no regime alternative provides for us.
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
snipeout wrote:
Yeah, until that well armed mob accuses you of something you didn’t do and they decide to string you up in your front yard.
Uhhh, this happens anyway. “Trial by jury” is trial by the same mob you think is not filled with justice. The only difference is there is no pretense of civility with “mob justice”. You think people lose their sense of justice just because some formal institution exists to “enforce” it? The idea of justice has to exist before an institution can exist to provide it. And frankly, I think we can provide justice to our individual communities with out police or government courts just fine.
I prefer to take my chances with “chaotic” self interest than the idea of uniformed justice. Maybe “mob justice” would keep people minding their own business for a change.
Butt the fuck out![/quote]
Thanks for that insight, Mr. Koresh.
[quote]Varqanir wrote:
snipeout wrote:
In 13 years in law enforcement I have never seen a person kill or maim another for their NEXT DRINK or NEXT CIGARETTE.
Snipe, you really need to get out more.
Man stabbed to death over a cigarette, South Africa
http://www.citizen.co.za/index/article.aspx?pDesc=86102,1,22
Woman shot to death over a cigarette, Baltimore, Maryland
http://wjz.com/local/cigarettes.dawn.shipley.2.716503.html
Man stabbed to death over a cigarette, Zimbabwe
http://www.newzimbabwe.com/pages/crime17.18896.html
Man beaten to death over cigarettes, Tucson, Arizona
http://www.tucsoncitizen.com/blog/view/841
Man beaten to death over pack of cigarettes, Waverly, Ohio
Man stabs wife to death over cigarettes, Sofia, Bulgaria
Man beaten to death over cigarettes, Washington DC
And my very favorite, 2-year old girl stomped and beaten to death over cigarettes, Singapore.
http://falseimages.blogspot.com/2009/01/child-killed-over-pack-of-cigarettes.html[/quote]
Man killed over potato chips, philly http://www.kyw1060.com/pages/2248995.php?contentType=4&contentId=2105234
Woman dead over fast food argument, St. Louis
http://www.beloblog.com/KMOV_Blogs/crimetracker/2008/09/north-st-louis-teen-shot-kille.html
Four of your examples weren’t even this country, 2 from Africa. If you look hard enough you can find anything. Nothing that you listed leads me to believe alcohol compares to meth, crack or heroin. How many of those articles list whether a tox screening was conducted?
Man beaten to death over pack of cigarettes, Waverly, Ohio
http://www.smokersclubinc.com/...cle&sid=821
From the article: I was there, I know what happened," Baxter said. “Fetty was buying drinks, and Ferman said he took his cigarettes.” He said he was drunk and high at the time.
Do you really believe by legalizing hard drugs and removing the stigma you are not going to create more addicts? I think it is a legitimate question. Also, at what point do someones personal liberties become violated if what they are doing infringes upon others. Smoking in restaraunts and bars is banned here, should I have to breathe that poison so I am not infringing on your rights? Do you infringe on my pursuit of life by smoking in my face? Now what about all the new people on disability because drug dependency is now a disease like alcoholism, my tax dollars go up because we have to support more of our tired and weak, not to mention increased crime rates. I don’t think we gain anything by legalizing such damaging substances.
[quote]jsbrook wrote:
Uhhh, this happens anyway. “Trial by jury” is trial by the same mob you think is not filled with justice. The only difference is there is no pretense of civility with “mob justice”. You think people lose their sense of justice just because some formal institution exists to “enforce” it? The idea of justice has to exist before an institution can exist to provide it. And frankly, I think we can provide justice to our individual communities with out police or government courts just fine.
Thanks for that insight, Mr. Koresh.[/quote]
Heh - and curiously, our resident dilettante hasn’t figured out that his scorned “jury” is exactly the form of justice created so “we” could provide justice to our “individual communities”.
[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
(2) we have made judgments that some we are ok with people doing and others we are not.[/quote]
Who’s this ‘we’ you’re referring to? Because for 194 years in America anyone could consume or ingest anything they wanted.
I saw Congress criminalize drugs in 1970, from what I’ve read I didn’t see a public outcry agreeing or calling for it.
[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
Most of the “legalize it all” claptrap is coffeehouse theory that could only apply in a world of social atoms where individual decisions only generate costs to the individual making them. We know that isn’t true, no matter how much libertarian dipshittery gets spilled on the page.[/quote]
How would me smoking a joint generate cost to anyone else?
Are you telling me you have no problem with the government dictating to the people what they can and can’t ingest? Would you have a problem with the government outlawing cigarettes, alcohol, and numerous foods and ingredients? Perhaps certain teas and more nutritional supplements?
The point isn’t the drugs, the point is setting the standard for allowing the government to pick and choose what people can ingest, whether it does their body good or bad.
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
Luckily, cops aren’t known to witness crimes happening so them not being armed will not be an issue.
I think police not carrying guns will provide them just the attitude adjustment we’re looking for.[/quote]
You know I think when I go back to work on thursday,I will follow that advice. Next time I see somebody break into a car instead of getting into a foot pursuit or getting into a dangerous car chase, I will simply ignore it.I’ll wait until the next day when the complainent needs a sector to respond for a stolen vehicle. I’ll simply take the report and call it a day.
[quote]Nyballer31 wrote:
LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
Luckily, cops aren’t known to witness crimes happening so them not being armed will not be an issue.
I think police not carrying guns will provide them just the attitude adjustment we’re looking for.
You know I think when I go back to work on thursday,I will follow that advice. Next time I see somebody break into a car instead of getting into a foot pursuit or getting into a dangerous car chase, I will simply ignore it.I’ll wait until the next day when the complainent needs a sector to respond for a stolen vehicle. I’ll simply take the report and call it a day.
[/quote]
To Liftic,
Lucky for us a know it all jack ass like you will never need us to respond to anything, so neither of us will ever have to worry. Chances are you will need someone in our position way before we ever need you.
[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
snipeout wrote:
Similar damage?
Well said.
These are apples-to-oranges comparisons because (1) the use and effects of the compared objects aren’t the same, and (2) we have made judgments that some we are ok with people doing and others we are not.
We have no interest in encouraging the use of, for example, crack cocaine and meth. The costs of widespread use of these are very high compared to other drugs. If anyone is unsure of this, ask anyone who used to be a crack or meth addict - if they are still alive.
Alcohol is subject to abuse, but that is a separate issue - empirically, alcohol abuse doesn’t match the kinds of abuse problems that harder drugs do.
Most of the “legalize it all” claptrap is coffeehouse theory that could only apply in a world of social atoms where individual decisions only generate costs to the individual making them. We know that isn’t true, no matter how much libertarian dipshittery gets spilled on the page.
Outlawing certain hard drugs creates a tax on consumption - which is exactly what a society does when it wants to discourage a particular act. Make the costs skyrocket, add punishment, make it hard to get - this is all the kit of disincentivizing the use of drugs, which is a moral good.
The usual argument against criminalization of hard drugs is that it has costs associated with it as well, but that is nothing more than Making the Perfect the Enemy of the Good. An imperfect regime that sputters and misfires is better than no regime, given what the no regime alternative provides for us.[/quote]
And who is making assumptions now?
You only have to look at Europe where the “tax on concumption” is not even close to being as severe as in the US, with what result?
We have less violent crime, less prison inmates, a less strained justice system.
Or you could look at Singapore where they kill you for weed, for Christs sake, and yet people still do drugs.
[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
These are apples-to-oranges comparisons because (1) the use and effects of the compared objects aren’t the same, and (2) we have made judgments that some we are ok with people doing and others we are not.
We have no interest in encouraging the use of, for example, crack cocaine and meth. [/quote]
I am interested in who the “we” is you are talking about.
When alcohol prohibition started it was obvious that an amendment was needed to start and to end it.
Somehow however that was no longer necessary when it came to the prohibition of anything else.
Can you point me to the part of your constitution that makes it legal for your federal government to be even active in that area?
Because it seem to me that “you” have spoken quite clearly on the subject of marijuana on several state levels, whereas “you” on a federal level seem to disagree, with no constitutional authority whatsoever.
Unless of course you use the “we” as the pluralis majestatis, but then you need to capitalize it.
[quote]snipeout wrote:
Nyballer31 wrote:
LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
Luckily, cops aren’t known to witness crimes happening so them not being armed will not be an issue.
I think police not carrying guns will provide them just the attitude adjustment we’re looking for.
You know I think when I go back to work on thursday,I will follow that advice. Next time I see somebody break into a car instead of getting into a foot pursuit or getting into a dangerous car chase, I will simply ignore it.I’ll wait until the next day when the complainent needs a sector to respond for a stolen vehicle. I’ll simply take the report and call it a day.
To Liftic,
Lucky for us a know it all jack ass like you will never need us to respond to anything, so neither of us will ever have to worry. Chances are you will need someone in our position way before we ever need you.[/quote]
Since you are constantly depending on people like him to pay you and he only very rarely needs a cop, that is unlikely.
[quote]snipeout wrote:
Sloth wrote:
Again, as long I don’t have to pay one penny to take care of the junkies out there, I’m cool. Pay for your own rehab and drug related medical issues, and we’ll both be happy.
You already pay tons of pennies. Almost every one of these junkies in jail receives welfare, medicaid food stamps or disability insurance. Why not legalize it, this way the government will have no control over what goes in these peoples body. Then for every new addict created we will have to subsidize them with our tax dollars so we can care for the junkie we LEGALLY created.
Legalizing more harmful products will slide us down a very slippery slope. Smokers and drinkers cost everyone enough in healthcare. Think of all the new babies born with much harsher disabilities. Heroin and cocaine do much more iter-uterine damage than smoking or casual alcohol use. Hell if the fetus repetetively detox’s it can die. Happens all the time to pregnant junkies, either that or they are born severly disabled.
If you think for one minute that legalizing it will not create more users you are sadly mistaken.[/quote]
I do realize that it does this already, in my fantasy world if you did such things you wouldn’t be eligible for such relief.
[quote]Nyballer31 wrote:
LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
Luckily, cops aren’t known to witness crimes happening so them not being armed will not be an issue.
I think police not carrying guns will provide them just the attitude adjustment we’re looking for.
You know I think when I go back to work on thursday,I will follow that advice. Next time I see somebody break into a car instead of getting into a foot pursuit or getting into a dangerous car chase, I will simply ignore it.I’ll wait until the next day when the complainent needs a sector to respond for a stolen vehicle. I’ll simply take the report and call it a day.
[/quote]
You see people break into cars on a regular basis? Liar.
My insurance agent does not think cops are good at crime prevention. Based on what I pay him for coverage, I am forced to agree.
On the other hand, he told me if I lived in a gated community with private security I would probably pay much lower insurance premiums. That tells me in my vision of society you would be answering to this guy.
I can’t believe people are responding to this guy, who is obviously a deranged inmate who was allowed access to some computer that is hooked up to some dial up connection somewhere.
Enough already stop feeding his ego.
[quote]Mikeyali wrote:
http://xavierthoughts.blogspot.com/2009/01/new-year-blood-in-new-orleans.html
Interesting story. As a citizen who carries on a daily basis I have consistently felt more afraid of police than of violent criminals. That is part of the reason I went from open carry to concealed carry.
What are your thoughts on plainclothes cops and arresting procedures?
mike[/quote]
Come ride the subway through Brooklyn or any other easy coast city at night sometime and I guarantee you that you will be happy to see a cop now and then.
[quote]phil_leotardo wrote:
Mikeyali wrote:
http://xavierthoughts.blogspot.com/2009/01/new-year-blood-in-new-orleans.html
Interesting story. As a citizen who carries on a daily basis I have consistently felt more afraid of police than of violent criminals. That is part of the reason I went from open carry to concealed carry.
What are your thoughts on plainclothes cops and arresting procedures?
mike
Come ride the subway through Brooklyn or any other easy coast city at night sometime and I guarantee you that you will be happy to see a cop now and then.
[/quote]
That may well be true if I were in Brooklyn. All I know for sure is that I’ve never had a fellow citizen bury my face in the sidewalk for telling a friend who was arrested randomly while crossing a crosswalk not to resist the cop as he was having an asthma attack. I’ve also never had a fellow citizen charge at me with his hand on his pistol for providing only my name and refusing my driver’s license. Nor have I had 4 citizens with hands on their pistols yank me out of line with beer and milk in my hands at the grocery store for legally open carrying my Beretta. Then again, perhaps that’s just because I’m smart enough not to live in Brooklyn.
mike
[quote]Mikeyali wrote:
phil_leotardo wrote:
Mikeyali wrote:
http://xavierthoughts.blogspot.com/2009/01/new-year-blood-in-new-orleans.html
Interesting story. As a citizen who carries on a daily basis I have consistently felt more afraid of police than of violent criminals. That is part of the reason I went from open carry to concealed carry.
What are your thoughts on plainclothes cops and arresting procedures?
mike
Come ride the subway through Brooklyn or any other easy coast city at night sometime and I guarantee you that you will be happy to see a cop now and then.
That may well be true if I were in Brooklyn. All I know for sure is that I’ve never had a fellow citizen bury my face in the sidewalk for telling a friend who was arrested randomly while crossing a crosswalk not to resist the cop as he was having an asthma attack. I’ve also never had a fellow citizen charge at me with his hand on his pistol for providing only my name and refusing my driver’s license. Nor have I had 4 citizens with hands on their pistols yank me out of line with beer and milk in my hands at the grocery store for legally open carrying my Beretta. Then again, perhaps that’s just because I’m smart enough not to live in Brooklyn.
mike[/quote]
cops are treated above the law regularly, why would you expect them to act under the law at all?
a lot of cops are good people, but to say theirs only a small minority of cops acting out of line and above the law is absurd.
i still see cops flash lights to get through traffic or red lights. every other emergency responder faces termination if they get caught doing it.
[quote]phil_leotardo wrote:
Come ride the subway through Brooklyn or any other easy coast city at night sometime and I guarantee you that you will be happy to see a cop now and then.
[/quote]
Precisely why people should carry concealed guns. I would be happy to never see a police officer.
[quote]Bigd1970 wrote:
I can’t believe people are responding to this guy, who is obviously a deranged inmate…[/quote]
Obviously. Why else would I be so anti-police and anti-state.
Probably because your from some anti government, commie, pinko, commune in Siberia! You can’t possibly be from anywhere else.