From: R&B on
On 2010-05-13 19:33:43 -0400, BAR said:

> In article <2010051318202741171-noneofyourbusiness(a)allcom>,
> none_of_your_business(a) says...
>>> But the way this law is being painted by the left you'd think this law
>>> does exactly that. Allows for the police to profile at will. This is
>>> not the case at all. In fact it was modified to make sure it was more
>>> than clear.
>> Describe for me what some who is "illegally here" looks like.
> Look in the mirror.

So now you're wanting to declare people who were born in Kansas City as

Methinks you've fallen off the edge, Bert.

Not that this is news.


From: Jack Hollis on
On Sun, 16 May 2010 07:17:58 -0700 (PDT), "John B."
<johnb505(a)> wrote:

>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.

I knew plenty of junkies and under the right conditions, they can
function quite well. Rush Limbaugh was addicted to opiates for years
and no one knew about it. Of course, he had enough money to buy as
much Oxy as he needed.

I had a close friend who was a heroin addict and he was a very
successful salesman for a heavy equipment manufacturer. The guy made
tons of money and never had to worry about scoring drugs. During the
day he'd take enough smack to keep from getting sick and at night, if
he wanted, he would get wasted. The next morning, he was in better
shape than a lot of alcoholics are.
From: Jack Hollis on
On Sun, 16 May 2010 11:55:53 -0700 (PDT), "John B."
<johnb505(a)> wrote:

>On May 16, 10:31=A0am, Jack Hollis <xslee...(a)> wrote:
>> On Sun, 16 May 2010 02:01:22 -0700 (PDT), alan <alangba...(a)>
>> wrote:
>> >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 =A0why would they not be able to function if
>> >they were being treated by smaller doses of heroin instead?
>> They use methadone because it gets around the laws against heroin.
>> Methadone has some advantages because you only need one oral dose a
>> day rather that 4 or 5 if you shoot smack. =A0Most addicts will tell you
>> that they prefer smack to methadone. =A0
>> Again, most of the negative aspects of heroin are because it's
>> illegal. =A0A heroin addict with a reliable affordable supply of drugs
>> can lead a fairly normal life.
>I have known and been around heroin addicts. They do NOT lead normal

Of course not. However, if heroin was legal they could.
From: Jack Hollis on
On Sun, 16 May 2010 13:26:36 -0700 (PDT), "John B."
<johnb505(a)> wrote:

>> No. Because the cost of getting heroin is so high they cannot lead
>> normal lives.
>> --
>> Alan Baker
>> Vancouver, British Columbia
>> <>
>It is clear that you know absolutely nothing about drug addiction.
>Addicts don't behave the way they do simply because illegal drugs are
>expensive. It's the addiction itself that keeps them from being
>responsible, productive members of society. I've seen this myself. You
>obviously haven't. As I said before, anybody who thinks a junkie is
>going to become a good parent if only we would legalize heroin is
>utterly ignorant of the effects of drug addiction.

You really don't know what you're talking about.
From: BAR on
In article <2010051617051025963-noneofyourbusiness(a)allcom>,
none_of_your_business(a) says...
> >>
> >>
> >> Describe for me what some who is "illegally here" looks like.
> >>
> >> Randy
> >>
> > What?
> Can you not read?
> Describe for me what someone who is "illegally here" looks like.

Look in th mirror.