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 Baker on 8 May 2010 02:57 In article <84j0l7Fd0fU1(a)mid.individual.net>, "dene" <dene(a)remove.ipns.com> wrote: > "Alan Baker" <alangbaker(a)telus.net> wrote in message > news:alangbaker-802EDC.10124607052010(a)news.shawcable.com... > > In article <84ivubF8jdU1(a)mid.individual.net>, > > "MNMikeW" <MNMiikkew(a)aol.com> wrote: > > > > > <bknight(a)conramp.net> wrote in message > > > news:pdh8u51hjtqck6u02ngmie5man0v822pv1(a)4ax.com... > > > > On Fri, 07 May 2010 09:42:28 -0700, Alan Baker <alangbaker(a)telus.net> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > >>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". > > > >> > > > > OK then. So open the flood gate of legal drugs TO THOUSANDS WHO WILL > > > > THEN DO HARM TO OTHERS. > > > > > > > >>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. > > > > > > > > The most basic tenet of our society is keeping us safe from those who > > > > would bring harm to us. When your happiness puts me at risk it is a > > > > basic wrong. Period. > > > > > > > > It's insane to give such freedom when you are assured that it will, in > > > > fact, cause harm to others. Your opinion would be different if a > > > > loved one was killed by someone driving a car while high on cocaine. > > > > If not, you're certainly in the minority. > > > > > > > > BK > > > > > > I've had two friends die from drugs. One with coke, one meth. Our > society > > > would end as we know it if these drugs were ever legalized. > > > > What complete and utter bullshit.. > > Hmmm.....I wonder if we have an addict in our midst. > > -Greg Just another thing for you to be wrong about, Greg. I don't even partake when the doobie makes the rounds of the dressing room. -- Alan Baker Vancouver, British Columbia <http://gallery.me.com/alangbaker/100008/DSCF0162/web.jpg>
From: dene on 8 May 2010 04:49 "John B." <johnb505(a)gmail.com> wrote in message news:98b86b30-e699-4bd9-8c48-fb8a007fbc38(a)e1g2000yqe.googlegroups.com... On May 7, 10:34 pm, Alan Baker <alangba...(a)telus.net> wrote: > In article <36e9u55fi552pto25hgoodsr5n05g1g...(a)4ax.com>, > > bkni...(a)conramp.net wrote: > > On Fri, 07 May 2010 20:50:47 -0400, Jack Hollis <xslee...(a)aol.com> > > wrote: > > > >On Fri, 07 May 2010 11:30:25 -0500, bkni...(a)conramp.net wrote: > > > >>So open the flood gate of legal drugs TO MILLIONS WHO MIGHT THEN DO > > >>HARM TO OTHERS. > > > >It's an assumption that legalization would increase drug use. > > > Legalized drugs will be far less expensive which validates that > > assumption. > > Sorry, but no. > > > >Fact is that drugs are easily available to anyone who wants them. Right > > >now, > > >it's easier for a High School kid to get illegal drugs than alcohol. > > > Ridiculous Jack. All a kid needs for alcohol is a fake ID, or one > > person of age to buy it...at hundreds of stores anywhere in his > > hometown. To get drugs is far more difficult and expensive. > > Far easier to get drugs. Those who sell them don't care about ID: fake > or otherwise. Is it now? Why don't you go out right now and buy a gram of coke if it's so easy. Let us know how you do. -------------------------------------------------------------- Agree. I wouldn't know where to begin to buy cocaine. -Greg
From: dene on 8 May 2010 04:52 "Alan Baker" <alangbaker(a)telus.net> wrote in message news:alangbaker-E9E9D9.22315507052010(a)news.shawcable.com... > In article > <e7c18318-b236-4a36-ad5d-883bc88a207f(a)e35g2000yqm.googlegroups.com>, > "John B." <johnb505(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > On May 7, 7:43 pm, Jack Hollis <xslee...(a)aol.com> wrote: > > > On Thu, 6 May 2010 19:59:03 -0700, "dene" <d...(a)remove.ipns.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > > >People should be personally responsible for the things you mentioned. > > > >However, none of the things you describe, in of themselves, are as > > > >addictive > > > >or destructive as cocaine, heroin, or meth. Hence the laws and > > > >consequences. > > > > > > >-Greg > > > > > > I'm not arguing that drugs are good. I'm saying that making drugs > > > illegal not only doesn't solve any of the problems caused by drug use, > > > it actually makes things much worse. > > > > > > As far as I can see, drug laws accomplish absolutely nothing and do a > > > huge amount of harm. > > > > So you think drug abuse and addiction and the many negative effects > > they have on our society would be diminished if drugs were legal? > > Yes. > > We'd treat drug addiction as a health problem. Addicts wouldn't need to > steal to feed their habits, because drugs would be (relatively) in > expensive. You forget the fact that there would be more addicts on hand or at the very least, functional users. Take account of the decrease in productivity, not to mention the impulsive, criminal decisions that are made when one is stoned. -Greg
From: BAR on 8 May 2010 08:48 In article <2010050711524348319-noneofyourbusiness(a)allcom>, none_of_your_business(a)all.com says... > > 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. The police profile all of the time. In fact in 2002 the police in the Washington DC area developed a profile for the DC Sniper which turned out to be completely wrong. Since this profile was of an angry white man the profiling was ok. Profiling is a tool to narrow down the focus of an investigation or advertising. However, when politics dictates that a few groups cannot be profiled for police investigations due political reasons the police are prevented from performing their duties.
From: BAR on 8 May 2010 08:56
In article <25a14d64-41a8-4d52-a412-0f4b7b382759 @q30g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>, johnb505(a)gmail.com says... > Your use of the word "reciprocity" might hold water if the Mexicans > were in the habit of shooting Americans who cross the Rio Grande > illegally, but I don't think they are. The Mexicans have laws that the enforce against illegal immigrants. This is the point of reciprocity Johnny. We need to adopt the policy of reciprocity. Mexicans nationals cannot own property in the US. Mexicans illegally in the US are jailed for 2 years upon their first offense, then deported. Mexicans illegally in the US are jailed for 10 years upon their second offense, then deported. You are smart enough to know what I was talking about but, you just wanted to play dumb so that you could support the open borders policy. |