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: bknight on 7 May 2010 12:17 On Fri, 7 May 2010 09:10:14 -0700, "dene" <dene(a)remove.ipns.com> wrote: > >"Alan Baker" <alangbaker(a)telus.net> wrote in message >news:alangbaker-37FBCB.08595907052010(a)news.shawcable.com... >> In article <ZpWEn.49$Ak3.47(a)newsfe16.iad>, >> "Frank Ketchum" <nospam(a)thanksanyway.fu> wrote: >> > >> Legalizing drugs is far from a conservative stance, Bobby. Very >liberal >> > >> indeed. >> > > >> > > Actually, it is hard-core libertarian. >> > >> > True, which explains why I support it. >> >> As do I. > >Uh huh. > >-Greg > I agree with Greg on this. Marijuana is one thing for which I support legalization. The hard stuff...no. If heroin or cocaine was legal there would be a ton of ordinary people trying it that would never do so if there were legal consequences. If you think that DUI is bad with alcohol is bad........and that's just the tip of the iceberg. BK
From: Alan Baker on 7 May 2010 12:19 In article <nve8u51igl1c24u0frf9uq4hm6sp1egqf6(a)4ax.com>, bknight(a)conramp.net wrote: > On Fri, 7 May 2010 09:10:14 -0700, "dene" <dene(a)remove.ipns.com> > wrote: > > > > >"Alan Baker" <alangbaker(a)telus.net> wrote in message > >news:alangbaker-37FBCB.08595907052010(a)news.shawcable.com... > >> In article <ZpWEn.49$Ak3.47(a)newsfe16.iad>, > >> "Frank Ketchum" <nospam(a)thanksanyway.fu> wrote: > > >> > >> Legalizing drugs is far from a conservative stance, Bobby. Very > >liberal > >> > >> indeed. > >> > > > >> > > Actually, it is hard-core libertarian. > >> > > >> > True, which explains why I support it. > >> > >> As do I. > > > >Uh huh. > > > >-Greg > > > > I agree with Greg on this. Marijuana is one thing for which I support > legalization. The hard stuff...no. If heroin or cocaine was legal > there would be a ton of ordinary people trying it that would never do > so if there were legal consequences. If you think that DUI is bad > with alcohol is bad........and that's just the tip of the iceberg. > > BK So punish people WHEN THE ACTUALLY DO HARM TO OTHERS. -- Alan Baker Vancouver, British Columbia <http://gallery.me.com/alangbaker/100008/DSCF0162/web.jpg>
From: bknight on 7 May 2010 12:30 On Fri, 07 May 2010 09:19:33 -0700, Alan Baker <alangbaker(a)telus.net> wrote: >In article <nve8u51igl1c24u0frf9uq4hm6sp1egqf6(a)4ax.com>, > bknight(a)conramp.net wrote: >> I agree with Greg on this. Marijuana is one thing for which I support >> legalization. The hard stuff...no. If heroin or cocaine was legal >> there would be a ton of ordinary people trying it that would never do >> so if there were legal consequences. If you think that DUI is bad >> with alcohol is bad........and that's just the tip of the iceberg. >> >> BK > >So punish people WHEN THE ACTUALLY DO HARM TO OTHERS. So open the flood gate of legal drugs TO MILLIONS WHO MIGHT THEN DO HARM TO OTHERS.
From: Alan Baker on 7 May 2010 12:42 In article <muf8u51phqasbvjgjo7g0js016enqqugn6(a)4ax.com>, bknight(a)conramp.net wrote: > On Fri, 07 May 2010 09:19:33 -0700, Alan Baker <alangbaker(a)telus.net> > wrote: > > >In article <nve8u51igl1c24u0frf9uq4hm6sp1egqf6(a)4ax.com>, > > bknight(a)conramp.net wrote: > > >> I agree with Greg on this. Marijuana is one thing for which I support > >> legalization. The hard stuff...no. If heroin or cocaine was legal > >> there would be a ton of ordinary people trying it that would never do > >> so if there were legal consequences. If you think that DUI is bad > >> with alcohol is bad........and that's just the tip of the iceberg. > >> > >> BK > > > >So punish people WHEN THE ACTUALLY DO HARM TO OTHERS. > > So open the flood gate of legal drugs TO MILLIONS WHO MIGHT THEN DO > HARM TO OTHERS. "Might" is not "will". The most basic tenet of our society is the freedom to do what each of us wants to pursue happiness. It's only when our behaviour *actually* harms others that it is supposed to have limits imposed upon it. -- Alan Baker Vancouver, British Columbia <http://gallery.me.com/alangbaker/100008/DSCF0162/web.jpg>
From: MNMikeW on 7 May 2010 12:45
"R&B" <none_of_your_business(a)all.com> wrote in message news:2010050711524348319-noneofyourbusiness(a)allcom... > On 2010-05-07 08:54:54 -0400, MNMikeW said: > >> "Carbon" <nobrac(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message >> news:4be34111$0$4888$9a6e19ea(a)unlimited.newshosting.com... >>> On Thu, 06 May 2010 12:49:06 -0500, MNMikeW wrote: >>>> "R&B" <none_of_your_business(a)all.com> wrote in message >>>> news:2010050612314318056-noneofyourbusiness(a)allcom... >>>> >>>>> But as to the Arizona law specifically... >>>>> >>>>> But where the Arizona law really runs into problems is where police >>>>> in that state won't stop me because I "look" illegal, but they could >>>>> stop Maria or Miguel, my neighbors, who are both second-generation US >>>>> citizens, both born in this country to immigrant citizens of the US. >>>>> That's where this law runs into serious constitutional questions. >>>>> And that's why I oppose it. It places legal citizens in situations >>>>> we've only read about in history books and seen in movies about the >>>>> Gestapo in Germany. It's unAmerican. >>>> >>>> This is wrong Randy. The law specifically states there must be lawful >>>> contact BEFORE any paper checking can happen. They cannot simply pull >>>> you over for looking a specific way. >>> >>> Yeah, because the police would never routinely pull visible minorities >>> over like that. >> >> Like they do now right? > > Yes, like they do right now. > > Randy > Riiiiiiight. |