Oldbear83 said:
Someone's desire to get high on drugs does not outweigh someone else's right to safety on the roads, at work, and at home.
We're 18 up at halfWichitabear said:
Hey!! Did you guys know there's a girl's basketball game going on????? Lol
Which really means you are still ignoring everything presented up to now, if it does not support your argument.Limited IQ Redneck in PU said:
Still waiting on the evidence that was requested.
No one's saying it does. If you're endangering someone's safety, you should be busted for endangering someone's safety...not for drugs.Oldbear83 said:
The difference between a libertarian and full-on hippy, is recognition of what freedoms cost other people.
Someone's desire to get high on drugs does not outweigh someone else's right to safety on the roads, at work, and at home.
Even if the drugs are the cause?Sam Lowry said:No one's saying it does. If you're endangering someone's safety, you should be busted for endangering someone's safety...not for drugs.Oldbear83 said:
The difference between a libertarian and full-on hippy, is recognition of what freedoms cost other people.
Someone's desire to get high on drugs does not outweigh someone else's right to safety on the roads, at work, and at home.
Yeah. If a grown man gets drunk and gets on the road, we arrest him for drunk driving. Not for possession of the demon rum.Oldbear83 said:Even if the drugs are the cause?Sam Lowry said:No one's saying it does. If you're endangering someone's safety, you should be busted for endangering someone's safety...not for drugs.Oldbear83 said:
The difference between a libertarian and full-on hippy, is recognition of what freedoms cost other people.
Someone's desire to get high on drugs does not outweigh someone else's right to safety on the roads, at work, and at home.
We also prosecute bars for over-serving people who are drunk, and we still prosecute moonshinersSam Lowry said:Yeah. If a grown man gets drunk and gets on the road, we arrest him for drunk driving. Not for possession of the demon rum.Oldbear83 said:Even if the drugs are the cause?Sam Lowry said:No one's saying it does. If you're endangering someone's safety, you should be busted for endangering someone's safety...not for drugs.Oldbear83 said:
The difference between a libertarian and full-on hippy, is recognition of what freedoms cost other people.
Someone's desire to get high on drugs does not outweigh someone else's right to safety on the roads, at work, and at home.
Sam Lowry said:Yeah. If a grown man gets drunk and gets on the road, we arrest him for drunk driving. Not for possession of the demon rum.Oldbear83 said:Even if the drugs are the cause?Sam Lowry said:No one's saying it does. If you're endangering someone's safety, you should be busted for endangering someone's safety...not for drugs.Oldbear83 said:
The difference between a libertarian and full-on hippy, is recognition of what freedoms cost other people.
Someone's desire to get high on drugs does not outweigh someone else's right to safety on the roads, at work, and at home.
I don't see the relevance. We're debating whether the substance should be illegal per se.Oldbear83 said:We also prosecute bars for over-serving people who are drunk, and we still prosecute moonshinersSam Lowry said:Yeah. If a grown man gets drunk and gets on the road, we arrest him for drunk driving. Not for possession of the demon rum.Oldbear83 said:Even if the drugs are the cause?Sam Lowry said:No one's saying it does. If you're endangering someone's safety, you should be busted for endangering someone's safety...not for drugs.Oldbear83 said:
The difference between a libertarian and full-on hippy, is recognition of what freedoms cost other people.
Someone's desire to get high on drugs does not outweigh someone else's right to safety on the roads, at work, and at home.
It matters because beyond a certain amount, the charge becomes dealing. It's important where we draw that line.Sam Lowry said:I don't see the relevance. We're debating whether the substance should be illegal per se.Oldbear83 said:We also prosecute bars for over-serving people who are drunk, and we still prosecute moonshinersSam Lowry said:Yeah. If a grown man gets drunk and gets on the road, we arrest him for drunk driving. Not for possession of the demon rum.Oldbear83 said:Even if the drugs are the cause?Sam Lowry said:No one's saying it does. If you're endangering someone's safety, you should be busted for endangering someone's safety...not for drugs.Oldbear83 said:
The difference between a libertarian and full-on hippy, is recognition of what freedoms cost other people.
Someone's desire to get high on drugs does not outweigh someone else's right to safety on the roads, at work, and at home.
How many additional people do you think would die? And based on what evidence?Canada2017 said:Sam Lowry said:Yeah. If a grown man gets drunk and gets on the road, we arrest him for drunk driving. Not for possession of the demon rum.Oldbear83 said:Even if the drugs are the cause?Sam Lowry said:No one's saying it does. If you're endangering someone's safety, you should be busted for endangering someone's safety...not for drugs.Oldbear83 said:
The difference between a libertarian and full-on hippy, is recognition of what freedoms cost other people.
Someone's desire to get high on drugs does not outweigh someone else's right to safety on the roads, at work, and at home.
So how many additional people have to die from driving under the influence of....
meth
heroin
cocaine
ludes
Before the innocent blood shed isn't worth the additional
'freedom' ?
Or we just going to run around saying 'cancer kills more ' ?
Alcohol is lethal too, but it's not against the law to deal in it.Oldbear83 said:It matters because beyond a certain amount, the charge becomes dealing. It's important where we draw that line.Sam Lowry said:I don't see the relevance. We're debating whether the substance should be illegal per se.Oldbear83 said:We also prosecute bars for over-serving people who are drunk, and we still prosecute moonshinersSam Lowry said:Yeah. If a grown man gets drunk and gets on the road, we arrest him for drunk driving. Not for possession of the demon rum.Oldbear83 said:Even if the drugs are the cause?Sam Lowry said:No one's saying it does. If you're endangering someone's safety, you should be busted for endangering someone's safety...not for drugs.Oldbear83 said:
The difference between a libertarian and full-on hippy, is recognition of what freedoms cost other people.
Someone's desire to get high on drugs does not outweigh someone else's right to safety on the roads, at work, and at home.
An ounce of weed is no big deal. An ounce of meth, yeah. An ounce of heroin, that's lethal.
If you owned your own business, would you hire someone you knew had a cocaine habit?Sam Lowry said:How many additional people do you think would die? And based on what evidence?Canada2017 said:Sam Lowry said:Yeah. If a grown man gets drunk and gets on the road, we arrest him for drunk driving. Not for possession of the demon rum.Oldbear83 said:Even if the drugs are the cause?Sam Lowry said:No one's saying it does. If you're endangering someone's safety, you should be busted for endangering someone's safety...not for drugs.Oldbear83 said:
The difference between a libertarian and full-on hippy, is recognition of what freedoms cost other people.
Someone's desire to get high on drugs does not outweigh someone else's right to safety on the roads, at work, and at home.
So how many additional people have to die from driving under the influence of....
meth
heroin
cocaine
ludes
Before the innocent blood shed isn't worth the additional
'freedom' ?
Or we just going to run around saying 'cancer kills more ' ?
Are there an unlimited number of people waiting until drugs are legalized so they can die of overdoses? If we legalized every drug, would everyone become an addict?
Are you seriously equating an ounce of alcohol to an ounce of heroin?Sam Lowry said:Alcohol is lethal too, but it's not against the law to deal in it.Oldbear83 said:It matters because beyond a certain amount, the charge becomes dealing. It's important where we draw that line.Sam Lowry said:I don't see the relevance. We're debating whether the substance should be illegal per se.Oldbear83 said:We also prosecute bars for over-serving people who are drunk, and we still prosecute moonshinersSam Lowry said:Yeah. If a grown man gets drunk and gets on the road, we arrest him for drunk driving. Not for possession of the demon rum.Oldbear83 said:Even if the drugs are the cause?Sam Lowry said:No one's saying it does. If you're endangering someone's safety, you should be busted for endangering someone's safety...not for drugs.Oldbear83 said:
The difference between a libertarian and full-on hippy, is recognition of what freedoms cost other people.
Someone's desire to get high on drugs does not outweigh someone else's right to safety on the roads, at work, and at home.
An ounce of weed is no big deal. An ounce of meth, yeah. An ounce of heroin, that's lethal.
Sam Lowry said:How many additional people do you think would die? And based on what evidence?Canada2017 said:Sam Lowry said:Yeah. If a grown man gets drunk and gets on the road, we arrest him for drunk driving. Not for possession of the demon rum.Oldbear83 said:Even if the drugs are the cause?Sam Lowry said:No one's saying it does. If you're endangering someone's safety, you should be busted for endangering someone's safety...not for drugs.Oldbear83 said:
The difference between a libertarian and full-on hippy, is recognition of what freedoms cost other people.
Someone's desire to get high on drugs does not outweigh someone else's right to safety on the roads, at work, and at home.
So how many additional people have to die from driving under the influence of....
meth
heroin
cocaine
ludes
Before the innocent blood shed isn't worth the additional
'freedom' ?
Or we just going to run around saying 'cancer kills more ' ?
Are there an unlimited number of people waiting until drugs are legalized so they can die of overdoses? If we legalized every drug, would everyone become an addict?
The main disincentive to hiring would be the law itself. Otherwise, it would depend on the business and the nature of the "habit." Plenty of cocaine users have jobs and do well at them. That's why we have to give them drug tests before we know to fire them.Oldbear83 said:If you owned your own business, would you hire someone you knew had a cocaine habit?Sam Lowry said:How many additional people do you think would die? And based on what evidence?Canada2017 said:Sam Lowry said:Yeah. If a grown man gets drunk and gets on the road, we arrest him for drunk driving. Not for possession of the demon rum.Oldbear83 said:Even if the drugs are the cause?Sam Lowry said:No one's saying it does. If you're endangering someone's safety, you should be busted for endangering someone's safety...not for drugs.Oldbear83 said:
The difference between a libertarian and full-on hippy, is recognition of what freedoms cost other people.
Someone's desire to get high on drugs does not outweigh someone else's right to safety on the roads, at work, and at home.
So how many additional people have to die from driving under the influence of....
meth
heroin
cocaine
ludes
Before the innocent blood shed isn't worth the additional
'freedom' ?
Or we just going to run around saying 'cancer kills more ' ?
Are there an unlimited number of people waiting until drugs are legalized so they can die of overdoses? If we legalized every drug, would everyone become an addict?
Why or why not?
No. Are you?Oldbear83 said:Are you seriously equating an ounce of alcohol to an ounce of heroin?Sam Lowry said:Alcohol is lethal too, but it's not against the law to deal in it.Oldbear83 said:It matters because beyond a certain amount, the charge becomes dealing. It's important where we draw that line.Sam Lowry said:I don't see the relevance. We're debating whether the substance should be illegal per se.Oldbear83 said:We also prosecute bars for over-serving people who are drunk, and we still prosecute moonshinersSam Lowry said:Yeah. If a grown man gets drunk and gets on the road, we arrest him for drunk driving. Not for possession of the demon rum.Oldbear83 said:Even if the drugs are the cause?Sam Lowry said:No one's saying it does. If you're endangering someone's safety, you should be busted for endangering someone's safety...not for drugs.Oldbear83 said:
The difference between a libertarian and full-on hippy, is recognition of what freedoms cost other people.
Someone's desire to get high on drugs does not outweigh someone else's right to safety on the roads, at work, and at home.
An ounce of weed is no big deal. An ounce of meth, yeah. An ounce of heroin, that's lethal.
How many are overdosing now? Far more than when it was legal.Canada2017 said:Sam Lowry said:How many additional people do you think would die? And based on what evidence?Canada2017 said:Sam Lowry said:Yeah. If a grown man gets drunk and gets on the road, we arrest him for drunk driving. Not for possession of the demon rum.Oldbear83 said:Even if the drugs are the cause?Sam Lowry said:No one's saying it does. If you're endangering someone's safety, you should be busted for endangering someone's safety...not for drugs.Oldbear83 said:
The difference between a libertarian and full-on hippy, is recognition of what freedoms cost other people.
Someone's desire to get high on drugs does not outweigh someone else's right to safety on the roads, at work, and at home.
So how many additional people have to die from driving under the influence of....
meth
heroin
cocaine
ludes
Before the innocent blood shed isn't worth the additional
'freedom' ?
Or we just going to run around saying 'cancer kills more ' ?
Are there an unlimited number of people waiting until drugs are legalized so they can die of overdoses? If we legalized every drug, would everyone become an addict?
Good grief man....how many Americans are over dosing NOW with opioids ....legal or otherwise ?
The culture of the US is far different than Portugal....and even there cannabis use increased from 7.8 to 12%, cocaine use more than doubled .9 to 1.9% , and heroin use increased from .7 to 1.1 %.
Have seen first hand people die from heroin.....and the lives of our best friends racked by their son's current addictions.
And meth ? Almost monthly saw the horrible impact of meth at the homeless shelter.
Sam Lowry said:How many are overdosing now? Far more than when it was legal.Canada2017 said:Sam Lowry said:How many additional people do you think would die? And based on what evidence?Canada2017 said:Sam Lowry said:Yeah. If a grown man gets drunk and gets on the road, we arrest him for drunk driving. Not for possession of the demon rum.Oldbear83 said:Even if the drugs are the cause?Sam Lowry said:No one's saying it does. If you're endangering someone's safety, you should be busted for endangering someone's safety...not for drugs.Oldbear83 said:
The difference between a libertarian and full-on hippy, is recognition of what freedoms cost other people.
Someone's desire to get high on drugs does not outweigh someone else's right to safety on the roads, at work, and at home.
So how many additional people have to die from driving under the influence of....
meth
heroin
cocaine
ludes
Before the innocent blood shed isn't worth the additional
'freedom' ?
Or we just going to run around saying 'cancer kills more ' ?
Are there an unlimited number of people waiting until drugs are legalized so they can die of overdoses? If we legalized every drug, would everyone become an addict?
Good grief man....how many Americans are over dosing NOW with opioids ....legal or otherwise ?
The culture of the US is far different than Portugal....and even there cannabis use increased from 7.8 to 12%, cocaine use more than doubled .9 to 1.9% , and heroin use increased from .7 to 1.1 %.
Have seen first hand people die from heroin.....and the lives of our best friends racked by their son's current addictions.
And meth ? Almost monthly saw the horrible impact of meth at the homeless shelter.
Portugal saw an initial mild increase in use followed by a decrease. Overdose deaths fell to the second lowest in the EU. Decriminalization in Portugal has been a resounding success.
A fairy-tale answer, devoid of sanitySam Lowry said:The main disincentive to hiring would be the law itself. Otherwise, it would depend on the business and the nature of the "habit." Plenty of cocaine users have jobs and do well at them. That's why we have to give them drug tests before we know to fire them.Oldbear83 said:If you owned your own business, would you hire someone you knew had a cocaine habit?Sam Lowry said:How many additional people do you think would die? And based on what evidence?Canada2017 said:Sam Lowry said:Yeah. If a grown man gets drunk and gets on the road, we arrest him for drunk driving. Not for possession of the demon rum.Oldbear83 said:Even if the drugs are the cause?Sam Lowry said:No one's saying it does. If you're endangering someone's safety, you should be busted for endangering someone's safety...not for drugs.Oldbear83 said:
The difference between a libertarian and full-on hippy, is recognition of what freedoms cost other people.
Someone's desire to get high on drugs does not outweigh someone else's right to safety on the roads, at work, and at home.
So how many additional people have to die from driving under the influence of....
meth
heroin
cocaine
ludes
Before the innocent blood shed isn't worth the additional
'freedom' ?
Or we just going to run around saying 'cancer kills more ' ?
Are there an unlimited number of people waiting until drugs are legalized so they can die of overdoses? If we legalized every drug, would everyone become an addict?
Why or why not?
Yes you are. I said an ounce of heroin was lethal, then you claimed alcohol was lethal, as if one shot of vodka was the same as shooting an ounce of heroin.Sam Lowry said:No. Are you?Oldbear83 said:Are you seriously equating an ounce of alcohol to an ounce of heroin?Sam Lowry said:Alcohol is lethal too, but it's not against the law to deal in it.Oldbear83 said:It matters because beyond a certain amount, the charge becomes dealing. It's important where we draw that line.Sam Lowry said:I don't see the relevance. We're debating whether the substance should be illegal per se.Oldbear83 said:We also prosecute bars for over-serving people who are drunk, and we still prosecute moonshinersSam Lowry said:Yeah. If a grown man gets drunk and gets on the road, we arrest him for drunk driving. Not for possession of the demon rum.Oldbear83 said:Even if the drugs are the cause?Sam Lowry said:No one's saying it does. If you're endangering someone's safety, you should be busted for endangering someone's safety...not for drugs.Oldbear83 said:
The difference between a libertarian and full-on hippy, is recognition of what freedoms cost other people.
Someone's desire to get high on drugs does not outweigh someone else's right to safety on the roads, at work, and at home.
An ounce of weed is no big deal. An ounce of meth, yeah. An ounce of heroin, that's lethal.
Oldbear83 said:Yes you are. I said an ounce of heroin was lethal, then you claimed alcohol was lethal, as if one shot of vodka was the same as shooting an ounce of heroin.Sam Lowry said:No. Are you?Oldbear83 said:Are you seriously equating an ounce of alcohol to an ounce of heroin?Sam Lowry said:Alcohol is lethal too, but it's not against the law to deal in it.Oldbear83 said:It matters because beyond a certain amount, the charge becomes dealing. It's important where we draw that line.Sam Lowry said:I don't see the relevance. We're debating whether the substance should be illegal per se.Oldbear83 said:We also prosecute bars for over-serving people who are drunk, and we still prosecute moonshinersSam Lowry said:Yeah. If a grown man gets drunk and gets on the road, we arrest him for drunk driving. Not for possession of the demon rum.Oldbear83 said:Even if the drugs are the cause?Sam Lowry said:No one's saying it does. If you're endangering someone's safety, you should be busted for endangering someone's safety...not for drugs.Oldbear83 said:
The difference between a libertarian and full-on hippy, is recognition of what freedoms cost other people.
Someone's desire to get high on drugs does not outweigh someone else's right to safety on the roads, at work, and at home.
An ounce of weed is no big deal. An ounce of meth, yeah. An ounce of heroin, that's lethal.
A very dishonest answer.
You're not making sense. I never compared a shot of alcohol with an ounce of heroin.Oldbear83 said:Yes you are. I said an ounce of heroin was lethal, then you claimed alcohol was lethal, as if one shot of vodka was the same as shooting an ounce of heroin.Sam Lowry said:No. Are you?Oldbear83 said:Are you seriously equating an ounce of alcohol to an ounce of heroin?Sam Lowry said:Alcohol is lethal too, but it's not against the law to deal in it.Oldbear83 said:It matters because beyond a certain amount, the charge becomes dealing. It's important where we draw that line.Sam Lowry said:I don't see the relevance. We're debating whether the substance should be illegal per se.Oldbear83 said:We also prosecute bars for over-serving people who are drunk, and we still prosecute moonshinersSam Lowry said:Yeah. If a grown man gets drunk and gets on the road, we arrest him for drunk driving. Not for possession of the demon rum.Oldbear83 said:Even if the drugs are the cause?Sam Lowry said:No one's saying it does. If you're endangering someone's safety, you should be busted for endangering someone's safety...not for drugs.Oldbear83 said:
The difference between a libertarian and full-on hippy, is recognition of what freedoms cost other people.
Someone's desire to get high on drugs does not outweigh someone else's right to safety on the roads, at work, and at home.
An ounce of weed is no big deal. An ounce of meth, yeah. An ounce of heroin, that's lethal.
A very dishonest answer.
I don't get what y'all are talking about. Who said one shot of vodka was equivalent to a full syringe of heroin?Canada2017 said:Oldbear83 said:Yes you are. I said an ounce of heroin was lethal, then you claimed alcohol was lethal, as if one shot of vodka was the same as shooting an ounce of heroin.Sam Lowry said:No. Are you?Oldbear83 said:Are you seriously equating an ounce of alcohol to an ounce of heroin?Sam Lowry said:Alcohol is lethal too, but it's not against the law to deal in it.Oldbear83 said:It matters because beyond a certain amount, the charge becomes dealing. It's important where we draw that line.Sam Lowry said:I don't see the relevance. We're debating whether the substance should be illegal per se.Oldbear83 said:We also prosecute bars for over-serving people who are drunk, and we still prosecute moonshinersSam Lowry said:Yeah. If a grown man gets drunk and gets on the road, we arrest him for drunk driving. Not for possession of the demon rum.Oldbear83 said:Even if the drugs are the cause?Sam Lowry said:No one's saying it does. If you're endangering someone's safety, you should be busted for endangering someone's safety...not for drugs.Oldbear83 said:
The difference between a libertarian and full-on hippy, is recognition of what freedoms cost other people.
Someone's desire to get high on drugs does not outweigh someone else's right to safety on the roads, at work, and at home.
An ounce of weed is no big deal. An ounce of meth, yeah. An ounce of heroin, that's lethal.
A very dishonest answer.
Sam is far too intelligent for this garbage . Must be a game of some kind .
Otherwise how would any 18 year old from a broken home going to fully comprehend the difference from one shot of vodka ....to a syringe full of heroin ?
The death toll would be absolutely horrific.
This is absurd. It's late. I'll have to break it down for you tomorrow or something.Oldbear83 said:
Sam: " I never compared a shot of alcohol with an ounce of heroin."
Earlier in the thread, I said "An ounce of heroin, that's lethal"
To which Sam replied "Alcohol is lethal too, but it's not against the law to deal in it."
Yes, you damn well did make that comparison.
"break it down" = 'desperately find excuse'Sam Lowry said:This is absurd. It's late. I'll have to break it down for you tomorrow or something.Oldbear83 said:
Sam: " I never compared a shot of alcohol with an ounce of heroin."
Earlier in the thread, I said "An ounce of heroin, that's lethal"
To which Sam replied "Alcohol is lethal too, but it's not against the law to deal in it."
Yes, you damn well did make that comparison.
Good grief.
Totally disagree. One can be Libertarian without the hippy baggage.Oldbear83 said:
The difference between a libertarian and full-on hippy, is recognition of what freedoms cost other people.
Someone's desire to get high on drugs does not outweigh someone else's right to safety on the roads, at work, and at home.
The word you're looking for is "psychedelic." All recreational drugs are psychotropic.Oldbear83 said:"break it down" = 'desperately find excuse'Sam Lowry said:This is absurd. It's late. I'll have to break it down for you tomorrow or something.Oldbear83 said:
Sam: " I never compared a shot of alcohol with an ounce of heroin."
Earlier in the thread, I said "An ounce of heroin, that's lethal"
To which Sam replied "Alcohol is lethal too, but it's not against the law to deal in it."
Yes, you damn well did make that comparison.
Good grief.
You could just admit that you were wrong in your post there, recognize that there are reasonable restrictions to discuss ... or you could be stubborn and repeat mistakes.
By the way, don't forget that we have not even touched upon the really scary drugs, like hallucinogens and psychotropic drugs. I can't imagine the defense someone would present for legalizing the recreational use of, say, PCP?
