Liberal solution to illegal immigration
in [Golf]
|
Prev: March of the Titans (brief video re: White Race, 1 min, 30sec)
Next: What the heck is Tiger doing?
From: alan on 16 May 2010 05:02 On May 15, 10:33 am, Jack Hollis <xslee...(a)aol.com> wrote: > On Fri, 14 May 2010 17:51:05 -0700 (PDT), "John B." > > <johnb...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >On May 14, 7:45=A0pm, Jack Hollis <xslee...(a)aol.com> wrote: > >> On Thu, 13 May 2010 14:27:12 -0700 (PDT), "John B." > > >> <johnb...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >> >You have yet to explain how or why legalizing drugs would have any of > >> >these effects. Legal or illegal, people still have to pay for them. > > >> Actually it's been explained a few times already. =A0Obviously you > >> haven't been paying attention. > > >I've been paying very close attention, and you have not explained it. > > If you could get a reliable supply of heroin for $25 a day rather than > $500, it would be possible for addicts to get the money they neeed > without stealing. One of the reasons that methadone was introduced > was to allow addicts to stop comitting crimes (many violent) in order > to support their habit. It also allowed addicts to get jobs and > resume a somewhat normal life. The addict benefited and so did the > community. > > In addition, if drugs were legally available in a store then street > gangs wouldn't be killing each other for the right to seel drugs on > the street. Nor would they be handing out free samples to try and get new customers hooked. > > >> >And why are children of drug addicts better off having their parents > >> >at home? Do you think junkies make good parents? > > >> If drugs were legal, they would have a lot better chance of being good > >> parents. > > >A junkie is a better parent if heroin is legal than if it's illegal? > >You can't be serious. Did the end of Prohibition make alcoholics > >better parents? > > Did it make them worse parents? Good point.
From: Carbon on 16 May 2010 08:56 On Sun, 16 May 2010 01:34:57 -0700, dene wrote: > "Carbon" <nobrac(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message > news:4bef532d$0$4954$9a6e19ea(a)unlimited.newshosting.com... >> On Sat, 15 May 2010 16:48:45 -0700, dene wrote: >>> "Carbon" <nobrac(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message >>> news:4beeaff2$0$4870$9a6e19ea(a)unlimited.newshosting.com... >>>> On Sat, 15 May 2010 06:50:48 -0700, John B. wrote: >>>>> On May 15, 5:56 am, Alan Baker <alangba...(a)telus.net> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> What game is that: the game where you should actually have some >>>>>> evidence to support what you claim? >>>>>> >>>>>> LOL >>>>> >>>>> You mean like the evidence you presented to support your claim >>>>> that legalizing heroin would make junkies better parents? >>>> >>>> I admit I know next to nothing about narcotics. But I would not be >>>> surprised if there wasn't some reasonably functional range between >>>> total withdrawal and being completely blasted. Say the parent is in >>>> a program where they get enough heroin to keep them thinking >>>> straight, but not enough to get wasted. The US is too Puritanical a >>>> place to be so rational about drug addiction, but it's conceivable >>>> at least. Isn't it? >>> >>> Good parenting requires sobriety. >> >> If the requirement is stone cold sobriety at all times then the vast >> majority of Americans are bad parents. > > I didn't say "stone cold." I had excellent parents who drank to > excess on occasion. That's a far cry from a heroin or meth addict. So you see that there are shades of grey. Good.
From: John B. on 16 May 2010 10:04 On May 15, 7:48 pm, "dene" <d...(a)remove.ipns.com> wrote: > "Carbon" <nob...(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message > > news:4beeaff2$0$4870$9a6e19ea(a)unlimited.newshosting.com... > > > > > On Sat, 15 May 2010 06:50:48 -0700, John B. wrote: > > > On May 15, 5:56 am, Alan Baker <alangba...(a)telus.net> wrote: > > > >> What game is that: the game where you should actually have some > > >> evidence to support what you claim? > > > >> LOL > > > > You mean like the evidence you presented to support your claim that > > > legalizing heroin would make junkies better parents? > > > I admit I know next to nothing about narcotics. But I would not be > > surprised if there wasn't some reasonably functional range between total > > withdrawal and being completely blasted. Say the parent is in a program > > where they get enough heroin to keep them thinking straight, but not > > enough to get wasted. The US is too Puritanical a place to be so > > rational about drug addiction, but it's conceivable at least. Isn't it? > > Good parenting requires sobriety. > > -Greg Absolutely.
From: John B. on 16 May 2010 10:14 On May 15, 10:06 pm, Carbon <nob...(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote: > On Sat, 15 May 2010 16:48:45 -0700, dene wrote: > > "Carbon" <nob...(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message > >news:4beeaff2$0$4870$9a6e19ea(a)unlimited.newshosting.com... > >> On Sat, 15 May 2010 06:50:48 -0700, John B. wrote: > >>> On May 15, 5:56 am, Alan Baker <alangba...(a)telus.net> wrote: > > >>>> What game is that: the game where you should actually have some > >>>> evidence to support what you claim? > > >>>> LOL > > >>> You mean like the evidence you presented to support your claim that > >>> legalizing heroin would make junkies better parents? > > >> I admit I know next to nothing about narcotics. But I would not be > >> surprised if there wasn't some reasonably functional range between > >> total withdrawal and being completely blasted. Say the parent is in a > >> program where they get enough heroin to keep them thinking straight, > >> but not enough to get wasted. The US is too Puritanical a place to be > >> so rational about drug addiction, but it's conceivable at least. > >> Isn't it? > > > Good parenting requires sobriety. > > If the requirement is stone cold sobriety at all times then the vast > majority of Americans are bad parents. That is not a requirement. But addiction to drugs or alcohol causes a person to be consumed with his/her need to be under the influence all the time. Addicts and alcoholics are irresponsible and self-absorbed. They spend money that their families need to live on. They have trouble holding jobs. A close friend of mine, now dead, was a terrible alcoholic. His wife estimated that he spent $12,000/year on liquor. I've seen families wrecked by alcoholism and drug addiction. And now Jack and Alan would have you believe that legalizing drugs would reduce these problems.
From: John B. on 16 May 2010 10:17
On May 16, 5:01 am, alan <alangba...(a)telus.net> wrote: > On May 15, 6:49 am, "John B." <johnb...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On May 15, 5:36 am, Alan Baker <alangba...(a)telus.net> wrote: > > > > In article > > > <f4dde301-6779-4317-ae04-21581e56e...(a)o15g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>, > > > "John B." <johnb...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On May 14, 7:45 pm, Jack Hollis <xslee...(a)aol.com> wrote: > > > > > On Thu, 13 May 2010 14:27:12 -0700 (PDT), "John B." > > > > > > <johnb...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > >You have yet to explain how or why legalizing drugs would have any of > > > > > >these effects. Legal or illegal, people still have to pay for them. > > > > > > Actually it's been explained a few times already. Obviously you > > > > > haven't been paying attention. > > > > > I've been paying very close attention, and you have not explained it. > > > > > > >And why are children of drug addicts better off having their parents > > > > > >at home? Do you think junkies make good parents? > > > > > > If drugs were legal, they would have a lot better chance of being good > > > > > parents. > > > > > A junkie is a better parent if heroin is legal than if it's illegal? > > > > Yup. > > > > > You can't be serious. Did the end of Prohibition make alcoholics > > > > better parents? > > > > Would banning nicotine make nicotine addicts better or worse parents? > > > It is truly idiotic to think that the legality of an addictive > > substance has some bearing on its effects, or to compare cigarettes to > > heroin. > > Afraid to answer my question? > > Nicotine addiction is one of the most powerful out there, so if it > were prohibited a very lucrative and expensive black market would form > to serve nicotine addicts. They would be forced to pay far more for > their fix than they pay now and that would impact their ability to > discharge the other responsiblities in their lives; including > parenting. > > Heroin addicts today are in pretty much that precise fix (if you'll > pardon the pun): they have to pay exorbitant prices to feed their > addiction and it impacts their ability to discharge the duties of a > normal life. A heroin addict who is receiving treatment with methadone > is able to function, so why would they not be able to function if > they were being treated by smaller doses of heroin instead? Who says they're able to function? What do you know about drug addiction? Have you ever known a drug addict? Tobacco is not a mind- altering substance, so your comparison is not valid. |