'if it prevents one crime its worth it' ***NOW WITH POLL****

[gigapet]

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
Actually, I voted "FVCK OFF GIGAPET YOUR STUPID"

This is proven by your misspelling your. It should be you're.

ahhhh another spelling nazi is precisely what AT needs....consider yourself 3 levels cooler than you used to be.

spelling clearly = how smart you are

it couldnt possibly have to do with how many other tasks you are juggling while posting

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: gigapet

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: gigapet

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: Eli

Originally posted by: Mookow

Originally posted by: Ilmater
People always worry about the "slippery slope," but it's been proven that this isn't a valid argument in modern history. Things like the Patriot Act could be argued to be the result of a slippery slope, but that would be falacious. The Patriot Act was a result of a catastrophic event, and I think you'll see many if not all of those laws rescinded in the future as we start to calm down - which would be the exact opposite of the "slippery slope" effect.

Take a minute to look at the history of gun control in England, starting around... oh, 1700 AD. Up until the 1996 (IIRC) school shooting incident that led the the 1997 ban on private handgun ownership, there was no singular event that preceeded any of the gun control regulations that was cited as a direct cause of their implementation. And interestingly, as gun control has gone up, so has gun crime. After the banning of private ownership of handguns in England, gun crime has gone up.

Not surprising in the slightest.

When something is illegal, it is forced underground.

The government cannot control something that is illegal. Period. It can try, but it will fail.

The only way to combat the problem is to embrace it. Take the power out of the hands of the criminals.

Watch crime go down.

My good lord, it is absolutely mind boggling how some of you can look at it from the completely opposite stance.

Prohibition. Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it.

Less freedom does NOT mean less crime. Never has, never will.

it sure will when there are soldiers policing with orders to shoot criminals on sight.......watch how fast ppl learn to follow the rules.

No, watch how much more desperate and dangerous criminals and criminal organizations become. Even Communist China and the USSR could not stop crime in this fashion. In the case of the USSR, they simply created the most deadly organized crime the world has ever seen.

yes they were missing a key piece of enforcement.....they lacked the right technology...

imagine a video camera that can discern whether or not you are committing a crime and report it to the enforcement squad...enforcement squad tracks you through the gps signal coming from the chip in your arm....pretty easy enforcement

Then you'll end up with an underground society that lives entirely outside the law.

 

[JulesMaximus]

Originally posted by: gigapet

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
Actually, I voted "FVCK OFF GIGAPET YOUR STUPID"

This is proven by your misspelling your. It should be you're.

ahhhh another spelling nazi is precisely what AT needs....consider yourself 3 levels cooler than you used to be.

spelling clearly = how smart you are

it couldnt possibly have to do with how many other tasks you are juggling while posting

Well, maybe you should stop stressing about the intrusion of government so much and focus on one thing at a time...like maybe a writing class. 😀

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: gigapet

Originally posted by: Beller0ph1
Honestly, if you're innocent, what does it matter?

WELL WHEN THEY START MAKING ACTIVITIES YOU ENJOY ILLEGAL IT WILL MATTER TO YOU WONT IT?

No one seems to care until it's their bull getting gored.

 

[gigapet]

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: gigapet

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: gigapet

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: Eli

Originally posted by: Mookow

Originally posted by: Ilmater
People always worry about the "slippery slope," but it's been proven that this isn't a valid argument in modern history. Things like the Patriot Act could be argued to be the result of a slippery slope, but that would be falacious. The Patriot Act was a result of a catastrophic event, and I think you'll see many if not all of those laws rescinded in the future as we start to calm down - which would be the exact opposite of the "slippery slope" effect.

Take a minute to look at the history of gun control in England, starting around... oh, 1700 AD. Up until the 1996 (IIRC) school shooting incident that led the the 1997 ban on private handgun ownership, there was no singular event that preceeded any of the gun control regulations that was cited as a direct cause of their implementation. And interestingly, as gun control has gone up, so has gun crime. After the banning of private ownership of handguns in England, gun crime has gone up.

Not surprising in the slightest.

When something is illegal, it is forced underground.

The government cannot control something that is illegal. Period. It can try, but it will fail.

The only way to combat the problem is to embrace it. Take the power out of the hands of the criminals.

Watch crime go down.

My good lord, it is absolutely mind boggling how some of you can look at it from the completely opposite stance.

Prohibition. Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it.

Less freedom does NOT mean less crime. Never has, never will.

it sure will when there are soldiers policing with orders to shoot criminals on sight.......watch how fast ppl learn to follow the rules.

No, watch how much more desperate and dangerous criminals and criminal organizations become. Even Communist China and the USSR could not stop crime in this fashion. In the case of the USSR, they simply created the most deadly organized crime the world has ever seen.

yes they were missing a key piece of enforcement.....they lacked the right technology...

imagine a video camera that can discern whether or not you are committing a crime and report it to the enforcement squad...enforcement squad tracks you through the gps signal coming from the chip in your arm....pretty easy enforcement

Then you'll end up with an underground society that lives entirely outside the law.

how would this work? how would they survive? whats stopping themf rom being found out?

 

[gigapet]

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus

Originally posted by: gigapet

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
Actually, I voted "FVCK OFF GIGAPET YOUR STUPID"

This is proven by your misspelling your. It should be you're.

ahhhh another spelling nazi is precisely what AT needs....consider yourself 3 levels cooler than you used to be.

spelling clearly = how smart you are

it couldnt possibly have to do with how many other tasks you are juggling while posting

Well, maybe you should stop stressing about the intrusion of government so much and focus on one thing at a time...like maybe a writing class. 😀

duely noted......you should stop caring about the spelling of others online and focus on inflating your ego.

 

[jyates]

Originally posted by: Eli

Originally posted by: jyates
I see what you are trying to say, by reducing those things that are currently a "crime" then people who exhibit that behavior won't be "criminals" And life and society will be just peachy because if it's not a "crime" exhibiting the behavior won't be "fun" any more and people will just quit it.

That way people will stop stealing and killing to get funds for their habits and drunk drivers and people under the influence will stop having accidents and killing innocent others on the roadways.

Extreme? not really if you want to grasp for it with your minds?

We are a people of laws or we were once upon a time.....

No! No no no, you have it completely backwards!

The reason people are driven to kill and commit crimes to support their habbit is a direct result of it being illegal! The government creates the underground market. It's simply supply and demand. The demand will ALWAYS be there. If you start locking drug dealers up for life, it will just drive the price of drugs up even more. This will cause the drug users to commit even more severe crimes to get their fix. This is NOT the goal!

Okay, look. I bet you drink alcohol. Nothing wrong with that.

You do realize that it used to be against the law to drink alcohol, right? What if the law enforcement of the time would've taken your stance and not given an inch? Locked everyone that was caught drinking or producing alcohol for life.

Yeah, we probably wouldn't have many alcoholics around now. But is that really what you want?

I am sure if you think about it from this point of view, you will realize the flaw in your logic.

Don't you understand that the freedom to fight our laws is what makes America great?

Eli,

There is no logic in allowing anyone to do anything they want at any time at the expense
of society.

I don't drink, but I don't knock people who drink but I do knock those to abuse
alcohol and let it affect the way they treat their families and friends and even strangers.
I also knock those who want to drink and then get behind the wheel. I'm glad we have laws
that say you shouldn't do that and that if you do choose to do this you will go to jail and perhaps
even prison.

You said "Yeah, we probably wouldn't have many alcoholics around now. But is that really what
you want?"

If by being an alcoholic, you mean someone who hurts anyone other than themself, I would have
to say it wouldn't bother me the least to have them out of society. They tend to raise offspring
with problems that we all know far too well.

Do you believe that if narcotics were made totally free for personal use tomorrow that
all crimes and costs to society would be zero?

I believe that we would see an explosion of problems in our society from narcotics usuage.

We've already seen what alcohol can do.

Why would we want as a people to put a blessing on the use of narcotics?

What positive benefits are there from drug use and do they outweigh the problems?

 

[MacBaine]

Originally posted by: gigapet

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: gigapet

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: gigapet

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: Eli

Originally posted by: Mookow

Originally posted by: Ilmater
People always worry about the "slippery slope," but it's been proven that this isn't a valid argument in modern history. Things like the Patriot Act could be argued to be the result of a slippery slope, but that would be falacious. The Patriot Act was a result of a catastrophic event, and I think you'll see many if not all of those laws rescinded in the future as we start to calm down - which would be the exact opposite of the "slippery slope" effect.

Take a minute to look at the history of gun control in England, starting around... oh, 1700 AD. Up until the 1996 (IIRC) school shooting incident that led the the 1997 ban on private handgun ownership, there was no singular event that preceeded any of the gun control regulations that was cited as a direct cause of their implementation. And interestingly, as gun control has gone up, so has gun crime. After the banning of private ownership of handguns in England, gun crime has gone up.

Not surprising in the slightest.

When something is illegal, it is forced underground.

The government cannot control something that is illegal. Period. It can try, but it will fail.

The only way to combat the problem is to embrace it. Take the power out of the hands of the criminals.

Watch crime go down.

My good lord, it is absolutely mind boggling how some of you can look at it from the completely opposite stance.

Prohibition. Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it.

Less freedom does NOT mean less crime. Never has, never will.

it sure will when there are soldiers policing with orders to shoot criminals on sight.......watch how fast ppl learn to follow the rules.

No, watch how much more desperate and dangerous criminals and criminal organizations become. Even Communist China and the USSR could not stop crime in this fashion. In the case of the USSR, they simply created the most deadly organized crime the world has ever seen.

yes they were missing a key piece of enforcement.....they lacked the right technology...

imagine a video camera that can discern whether or not you are committing a crime and report it to the enforcement squad...enforcement squad tracks you through the gps signal coming from the chip in your arm....pretty easy enforcement

Then you'll end up with an underground society that lives entirely outside the law.

how would this work? how would they survive? whats stopping themf rom being found out?

Go jack off to Equilibrium or something. God... you need to drop the whole "OMG THE GOVERNMENT IS PWNING ME!" crap dude...

 

[JulesMaximus]

Originally posted by: gigapet

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus

Originally posted by: gigapet

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
Actually, I voted "FVCK OFF GIGAPET YOUR STUPID"

This is proven by your misspelling your. It should be you're.

ahhhh another spelling nazi is precisely what AT needs....consider yourself 3 levels cooler than you used to be.

spelling clearly = how smart you are

it couldnt possibly have to do with how many other tasks you are juggling while posting

Well, maybe you should stop stressing about the intrusion of government so much and focus on one thing at a time...like maybe a writing class. 😀

duely noted......you should stop caring about the spelling of others online and focus on inflating your ego.

Done and done! :laugh:

Believe me, knowing how to speak and write fairly well does not inflate my ego...much.

 

[gigapet]

Originally posted by: MacBaine

Originally posted by: gigapet

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: gigapet

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: gigapet

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: Eli

Originally posted by: Mookow

Originally posted by: Ilmater
People always worry about the "slippery slope," but it's been proven that this isn't a valid argument in modern history. Things like the Patriot Act could be argued to be the result of a slippery slope, but that would be falacious. The Patriot Act was a result of a catastrophic event, and I think you'll see many if not all of those laws rescinded in the future as we start to calm down - which would be the exact opposite of the "slippery slope" effect.

Take a minute to look at the history of gun control in England, starting around... oh, 1700 AD. Up until the 1996 (IIRC) school shooting incident that led the the 1997 ban on private handgun ownership, there was no singular event that preceeded any of the gun control regulations that was cited as a direct cause of their implementation. And interestingly, as gun control has gone up, so has gun crime. After the banning of private ownership of handguns in England, gun crime has gone up.

Not surprising in the slightest.

When something is illegal, it is forced underground.

The government cannot control something that is illegal. Period. It can try, but it will fail.

The only way to combat the problem is to embrace it. Take the power out of the hands of the criminals.

Watch crime go down.

My good lord, it is absolutely mind boggling how some of you can look at it from the completely opposite stance.

Prohibition. Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it.

Less freedom does NOT mean less crime. Never has, never will.

it sure will when there are soldiers policing with orders to shoot criminals on sight.......watch how fast ppl learn to follow the rules.

No, watch how much more desperate and dangerous criminals and criminal organizations become. Even Communist China and the USSR could not stop crime in this fashion. In the case of the USSR, they simply created the most deadly organized crime the world has ever seen.

yes they were missing a key piece of enforcement.....they lacked the right technology...

imagine a video camera that can discern whether or not you are committing a crime and report it to the enforcement squad...enforcement squad tracks you through the gps signal coming from the chip in your arm....pretty easy enforcement

Then you'll end up with an underground society that lives entirely outside the law.

how would this work? how would they survive? whats stopping themf rom being found out?

Go jack off to Equilibrium or something. God... you need to drop the whole "OMG THE GOVERNMENT IS PWNING ME!" crap dude...

i'll jack off to equilibrium as long no one is watching.

 

[MacBaine]

Originally posted by: gigapet

Originally posted by: MacBaine

Originally posted by: gigapet

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: gigapet

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: gigapet

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: Eli

Originally posted by: Mookow

Originally posted by: Ilmater
People always worry about the "slippery slope," but it's been proven that this isn't a valid argument in modern history. Things like the Patriot Act could be argued to be the result of a slippery slope, but that would be falacious. The Patriot Act was a result of a catastrophic event, and I think you'll see many if not all of those laws rescinded in the future as we start to calm down - which would be the exact opposite of the "slippery slope" effect.

Take a minute to look at the history of gun control in England, starting around... oh, 1700 AD. Up until the 1996 (IIRC) school shooting incident that led the the 1997 ban on private handgun ownership, there was no singular event that preceeded any of the gun control regulations that was cited as a direct cause of their implementation. And interestingly, as gun control has gone up, so has gun crime. After the banning of private ownership of handguns in England, gun crime has gone up.

Not surprising in the slightest.

When something is illegal, it is forced underground.

The government cannot control something that is illegal. Period. It can try, but it will fail.

The only way to combat the problem is to embrace it. Take the power out of the hands of the criminals.

Watch crime go down.

My good lord, it is absolutely mind boggling how some of you can look at it from the completely opposite stance.

Prohibition. Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it.

Less freedom does NOT mean less crime. Never has, never will.

it sure will when there are soldiers policing with orders to shoot criminals on sight.......watch how fast ppl learn to follow the rules.

No, watch how much more desperate and dangerous criminals and criminal organizations become. Even Communist China and the USSR could not stop crime in this fashion. In the case of the USSR, they simply created the most deadly organized crime the world has ever seen.

yes they were missing a key piece of enforcement.....they lacked the right technology...

imagine a video camera that can discern whether or not you are committing a crime and report it to the enforcement squad...enforcement squad tracks you through the gps signal coming from the chip in your arm....pretty easy enforcement

Then you'll end up with an underground society that lives entirely outside the law.

how would this work? how would they survive? whats stopping themf rom being found out?

Go jack off to Equilibrium or something. God... you need to drop the whole "OMG THE GOVERNMENT IS PWNING ME!" crap dude...

i'll jack off to equilibrium as long no one is watching.

Well you don't have to worry about your girlfriend watching when she doesn't exist.

 

[gigapet]

Originally posted by: MacBaine

Originally posted by: gigapet

Originally posted by: MacBaine


Go jack off to Equilibrium or something. God... you need to drop the whole "OMG THE GOVERNMENT IS PWNING ME!" crap dude...

i'll jack off to equilibrium as long no one is watching.

Well you don't have to worry about your girlfriend watching when she doesn't exist.

wtf? why would i worry about a girl friend watching anyways.....and how is you claiming i dont have a girlfriend supposed to effect me?.....just makes you look childish if anything...

 

[jyates]

Getting a little off the subject aren't we? 🙂

 

[Eli]

Originally posted by: jyates

Eli,

There is no logic in allowing anyone to do anything they want at any time at the expense
of society.

I don't drink, but I don't knock people who drink but I do knock those to abuse
alcohol and let it affect the way they treat their families and friends and even strangers.
I also knock those who want to drink and then get behind the wheel. I'm glad we have laws
that say you shouldn't do that and that if you do choose to do this you will go to jail and perhaps
even prison.

You said "Yeah, we probably wouldn't have many alcoholics around now. But is that really what
you want?"

If by being an alcoholic, you mean someone who hurts anyone other than themself, I would have
to say it wouldn't bother me the least to have them out of society. They tend to raise offspring
with problems that we all know far too well.

Do you believe that if narcotics were made totally free for personal use tomorrow that
all crimes and costs to society would be zero?

I believe that we would see an explosion of problems in our society from narcotics usuage.

We've already seen what alcohol can do.

Why would we want as a people to put a blessing on the use of narcotics?

What positive benefits are there from drug use and do they outweigh the problems?

Wait, you're losing sight of what we're talking about. I completely agree with your analysis of alcoholics. That isn't the point.

The point is that it is not the drugs fault that the user is using it. We need to address the underlying issue of drug use. Making it illegal does absolutely nothing. It gives criminals money, and makes it difficult for those that use drugs.

They key to drug use prevention is education. And I don't mean bullsh!t propaganda like DARE.

You're looking at it too black and white. It would be impossible to legalize all narcotics tomorrow, and that isn't what I'm saying should happen. Again, the key is education. We have to educate people about drug use. People need to be raised in households where they are not subject to abuses that cause them to be abusers and addicts.


We would not see an explosion of problems in our society related to drug use as long as education regarding them was stepped up.

We need to look no further than The Netherlands to see what 100% legal drug use is like. Drug use does not go up with legalization, it goes down.

What positive benefits are there from drug use and do they outweigh the problems?

Again, you're looking at it backwards.

The problems already exist. The problem is that drugs are illegal. There would be very, very little drug related crime if it wasn't worth it for drug dealers to.. deal drugs. There would be very little drug related crime if drugs weren't so expensive due to the fact that they are against the law.

You cannot stop someone from using drugs. It is impossible. The people that use drugs are going to use drugs, the people that are prone to becomming addicts are going to become addicts.

That is the problem society has.

 

[MacBaine]

Originally posted by: gigapet

Originally posted by: MacBaine

Originally posted by: gigapet

Originally posted by: MacBaine


Go jack off to Equilibrium or something. God... you need to drop the whole "OMG THE GOVERNMENT IS PWNING ME!" crap dude...

i'll jack off to equilibrium as long no one is watching.

Well you don't have to worry about your girlfriend watching when she doesn't exist.

wtf? why would i worry about a girl friend watching anyways.....and how is you claiming i dont have a girlfriend supposed to effect me?.....just makes you look childish if anything...

You're saying I look childish when you are on a 2-page rant about how we're turning into Nazi Germany because a police officer drove by your house funny yesterday.

 

[gigapet]

Originally posted by: MacBaine

Originally posted by: gigapet

Originally posted by: MacBaine

Originally posted by: gigapet

Originally posted by: MacBaine


Go jack off to Equilibrium or something. God... you need to drop the whole "OMG THE GOVERNMENT IS PWNING ME!" crap dude...

i'll jack off to equilibrium as long no one is watching.

Well you don't have to worry about your girlfriend watching when she doesn't exist.

wtf? why would i worry about a girl friend watching anyways.....and how is you claiming i dont have a girlfriend supposed to effect me?.....just makes you look childish if anything...

You're saying I look childish when you are on a 2-page rant about how we're turning into Nazi Germany because a police officer drove by your house funny yesterday.

wtf are you talking about .......2 page rant....i never ranted more than two paragraphs this whole thread.....

police drove by my house ? WTF.............

go away.

 

[jyates]

Originally posted by: Eli

Originally posted by: jyates

Eli,

There is no logic in allowing anyone to do anything they want at any time at the expense
of society.

I don't drink, but I don't knock people who drink but I do knock those to abuse
alcohol and let it affect the way they treat their families and friends and even strangers.
I also knock those who want to drink and then get behind the wheel. I'm glad we have laws
that say you shouldn't do that and that if you do choose to do this you will go to jail and perhaps
even prison.

You said "Yeah, we probably wouldn't have many alcoholics around now. But is that really what
you want?"

If by being an alcoholic, you mean someone who hurts anyone other than themself, I would have
to say it wouldn't bother me the least to have them out of society. They tend to raise offspring
with problems that we all know far too well.

Do you believe that if narcotics were made totally free for personal use tomorrow that
all crimes and costs to society would be zero?

I believe that we would see an explosion of problems in our society from narcotics usuage.

We've already seen what alcohol can do.

Why would we want as a people to put a blessing on the use of narcotics?

What positive benefits are there from drug use and do they outweigh the problems?

Wait, you're losing sight of what we're talking about. I completely agree with your analysis of alcoholics. That isn't the point.

The point is that it is not the drugs fault that the user is using it. We need to address the underlying issue of drug use. Making it illegal does absolutely nothing. It gives criminals money, and makes it difficult for those that use drugs.

They key to drug use prevention is education. And I don't mean bullsh!t propaganda like DARE.

You're looking at it too black and white. It would be impossible to legalize all narcotics tomorrow, and that isn't what I'm saying should happen. Again, the key is education. We have to educate people about drug use. People need to be raised in households where they are not subject to abuses that cause them to be abusers and addicts.


We would not see an explosion of problems in our society related to drug use as long as education regarding them was stepped up.

We need to look no further than The Netherlands to see what 100% legal drug use is like. Drug use does not go up with legalization, it goes down.

What positive benefits are there from drug use and do they outweigh the problems?

Again, you're looking at it backwards.

The problems already exist. The problem is that drugs are illegal. There would be very, very little drug related crime if it wasn't worth it for drug dealers to.. deal drugs. There would be very little drug related crime if drugs weren't so expensive due to the fact that they are against the law.

You cannot stop someone from using drugs. It is impossible. The people that use drugs are going to use drugs, the people that are prone to becomming addicts are going to become addicts.

That is the problem society has.

We'll have to disagree on the merits of drugs becoming legal Eli. I don't for one minute
believe that making drugs legal would slow down the usage of them Netherlands or not.
I can see where drug trafficking crimes might lessen, but you haven't convinced me that
we wouldn't see a jump in drug related accidents and deaths from the legalization of
drugs.

I think the comparision of what alcohol has done and is doing in our society and drugs
becoming legal is a very valid one.

I for one am not ready to let that "genie" out of the bottle.

Jim

 

[carpenter]

Our Constitutional Rights are the most precious thing we have. Our country was founded by people looking for true freedom. Human nature is if I take a little, I want a lot more. I don't know if any of you are or personally know any police officers, but if you do, then you know that they are only human. And knowing quite a few of them personally, I don't want them involved in my life unless absolutely necessary. When you say "gun control", listen to the 2nd word. The 2nd amendment to the Constitution was written by people who saw from the past that if you disarm the population, you are telling crooks they are helpless. Have at em. And those crooks are sitting in a lot of polical offices. We see and hear about that every day. Facial recognition software is already being used by law enforcement agencies with these stop light cameras. For speeding tickets and running red lights? Yeah, right. Unfortunately the sad fact is when we give up a little of our freedom, more is taken. People who want to be "protected" don't want to take the responsibility to protect themselves. And Skoorb, with over 40,000 posts, I can see why you don't mind being filmed out in public but not in your home. You don't go out of your home. And the sad fact is, when we get so isolated from everyone else, we don't see that there is a huge portion of the population that is not saying anything, but they totally disagree with our government trying to control us instead of the other way around. Everything we have is because of private individuals, not because of government. What do they produce besides laws?

That's my rant for the month. (maybe)