|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,367
Legend
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,367 |
I meant my own sentence above what I wrote. You are the one bringing in the burden on society, and I was simply pointing out there are many who are a burdens on society. It doesn't take being a drug user to be a drain or burden on society.
My point was that we make them more of a burden on society by making it illegal.
The conversation simply bloomed out of these comments. That's the way conversations work. They don't stay perfectly compartmentalized the way you would like them to be.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,955
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,955 |
Quote:
The thread is about ILLEGAL drugs.
The thread is about what drugs you've used, not the fact that they're illegal. You're the one that changed its course. 
#gmstrong #gmlapdance
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 10,246
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 10,246 |
After reading this thread, I think I'm going to have to change my answer from "none" to "all." 
I am unfamiliar with this feeling of optimism
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,960
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,960 |
Quote:
The thread is about what drugs you've used, not the fact that they're illegal
burn
President - Fort Collins Browns Backers
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,718
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,718 |
Quote:
My point was that we make them more of a burden on society by making it illegal.
We aren't "making" them illegal. They are already illegal.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,718
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,718 |
Quote:
Quote:
The thread is about ILLEGAL drugs.
The thread is about what drugs you've used, not the fact that they're illegal. You're the one that changed its course.
LMFAO
I replied to what was posted.....and will stop now for 2 reasons.
1. I've seen this show before.
2. Derden is a troll.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,955
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,955 |
 Okay, you're right...you didn't start the landslide.
#gmstrong #gmlapdance
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465 |
Quote:
Quote:
I realize that there are very sad things that can and do happen surrounding drug use/abuse.
I wonder....overall, who costs society more -- drug users or alcoholics?
I would guesstimate drug use due to the fact that it is illegal and our system is bloated by convictions on that.
That's the result of our drug laws, not the actions of drug users.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,419
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,419 |
Really?
Theft is illegal. Are our prisons bloated with thiefs because of our laws against theft, or because people steal stuff?
How about murderers? Are our prisons bloated because of the actions of those who commit murder, or because of the laws?
Look, the simple fact is that illegal drugs are just that, illegal. There are penalties for breaking laws concerning drugs just as there are for breaking laws concerning other criminal offenses. If someone wants to do drugs, then either work to change the laws, or get locked up if you get caught. I really hate it when people whine about how "unfair" it all is though. No one forced cocaine up the noses of those in prison, and probably no one forced them into a drug lifestyle.
I will say that I do think that marijuana should be legalized and taxed at a ridiculous level. There should be laws against driving under the influence just as there are for alcohol. However, until and unless certain drugs become legal, then it's a matter of "take your chances, and pay the price if you get caught." No one can say "Oh, I didn't realize that it was illegal ........" or "Well, it shouldn't be illegal ...." because the bottom line is that the laws are pretty damn clear.
So ...... since there are laws in place .... agree or disagree ...... it is the actions of drug users that cause the end result of drug users going to jail/prison.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465 |
Quote:
Theft is illegal. Are our prisons bloated with thiefs because of our laws against theft, or because people steal stuff?
How about murderers? Are our prisons bloated because of the actions of those who commit murder, or because of the laws?
Theft and murder aren't the primary reason that our prison population skyrocketed in the last thirty years.
When you're looking at a system that sends someone with two ounces of pot on them to a minimum of 15 years ... I would probably examine the problem through the scope of the laws in place, rather than the offenders.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,419
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,419 |
Again .. if you break the law ....... and in addition, do so with full knowledge that you are breaking the law ..... then what should any reasonable person expect the consequences to be?
If a person goes to jail for a drug related charge, they have no one but themself to blame. The law is the law. People in jail chose to ignore and violate the law ..... so they went to jail.
Again, they have no one to blame but themselves. They chose to break the law.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,960
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,960 |
I don't think anyone will argue that, that is common sense.
I think Phil is saying our prisons are housing "petty" drug offenders. Meaning the law is the problem, not the users. Id also venture to say Marijuana is at the center of that conversation.
President - Fort Collins Browns Backers
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,802
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,802 |
Quote:
Again .. if you break the law ....... and in addition, do so with full knowledge that you are breaking the law ..... then what should any reasonable person expect the consequences to be?
Laws that have proportional punishment to the offense. I don't think any sane person can say distributing a plant- particularly as harmless (at least in comparison to alcohol/nicotine) as marijuana warrants fifteen years of jail bars. It's not a war on drugs; it's more so on personal freedom. The alleged "War on Drugs" doesn't do what it intends to and actually results in more synthetic, destructive drugs made from grocery store ingredients at home. The 90s spike in crack cocaine use on top of the prevalence of methamphetamine show that pretty clearly.
Interesting statistic on the Netherlands. Keep in mind, they didn't flat-out "legalize" all drugs. The difference is heavy decriminalization and separating markets for illicit drugs (it should send real red flags when a gov't lumps pot in with crack, heroin and cocaine; seriously, if they'll lie about dangers of marijuana, then what else will your gov't lie about?).
Quote:
(1997-1999) "The figures for cannabis use among the general population reveal the same pictures. The Netherlands does not differ greatly from other European countries. In contrast, a comparison with the US shows a striking difference in this area: 32.9% of Americans aged 12 and above have experience with cannabis and 5.1% have used in the past month. These figures are twice as high as those in the Netherlands.
Sure it's ten years old. But if you think much has changed regarding those use rates you fool yourself. I didn't feel like searching beyond that first page. Just saying, folks.
http://drugwarfacts.org/cms/?q=node/67
As to the question. Just marijuana. It's better for me- particularly with my alcoholic bloodlines and family history of heart problems- to have a recreational tendency to smoke that than it is to drink alcohol. Look at the case that made the substance illegal and tell me that its prohibition was ever truly justifiable.
As for those who tell me it's against the law and that I should expect to pay consequences for doing such....
"It is a just man who breaks an unjust law" - Plato
Politicians are puppets, y'all. Let's get Geppetto!
Formerly 4yikes2yoshi0
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,955
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,955 |
Quote:
As for those who tell me it's against the law and that I should expect to pay consequences for doing such....
I think it should be legal, but until it is, I think you should expect to pay to play. You KNOW you are breaking a law. No matter how unfair or messed up it is, you should pay the price if busted.
And, as far as the Netherlands....kids are exposed to pot much younger. Here, it's a big taboo thing and kids have to run out and try it as soon as they can (much like alcohol). I think if we had more lenient laws there would be fewer users.
#gmstrong #gmlapdance
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,419
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,419 |
I would think that ...... but look at how bad cigarettes are for a person ........ it's advertised on each and every pack ....... yet smokers still buy pack after pack ..... and many kill themselves .... even knowing how bad they are. I say this as a former cigarette smoker too. I did it for way too many years. Man was I stupid.  So ..... maybe legalization won't do anything except raise the prices.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,955
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,955 |
Maybe. There are so many variables it's hard to even guess at what could possibly happen. 
#gmstrong #gmlapdance
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 16,195
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 16,195 |
In this economy, where the need to increase tax revenue is at the forefront of our fiscal nightmare, this appears to be a ripe vine the government isn't picking.
Maybe we should elect a farmer...
#GMSTRONG
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465 |
Quote:
Again .. if you break the law ....... and in addition, do so with full knowledge that you are breaking the law ..... then what should any reasonable person expect the consequences to be?
Reasonable sentencing?
Quote:
Again, they have no one to blame but themselves. They chose to break the law.
Agreed. No one's arguing that.
I'm arguing that the laws aren't helping. They're hurting.
Let me ask ... would you be opposed to mandatory 3 year prison sentences for D.U.I. offenders?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,419
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,419 |
The argument is not "are the laws fair" ..... the question is, did those in prison on drug charges break the laws that were in effect at the time of their arrest/trial/conviction?
I think that you'll find that almost each and every one of them did.
One man's excessive sentence is another man's slap on the wrist. If someone knows that they are going to get a long and painful sentence for dealiing drugs .... then they have no one but themselves to blame if/when they have to pay the price.
I bet that I could go through the entire justice system and find mandatory sentencing guidelines that I vehemently disagree with. As a whole, I dislike mandatory sentences, because I think that it eliminates the judge as a "balance" to a verdict that may have been reached emotionally by a jury, rather than strictly through evidence. I seem to recall a case of a very young kid who wound up being tried as a adult and being sentenced to adult prison for life in a murder case. I don't agree with that either. However .... if you don't want to pay the price for committing murder, don't do it. If you don't want to pay the price for dealing drugs, don't do it. It really is that simple. People can work to change laws and sentencing guidelines that they see as unfair ..... but until and unless it happens .... then it just sucks to be those who chose to break the law.
Let's face facts here ..... drugs laws are the one type of law that is almost never "accidently" broken. It is absolutely and completely premeditated in damn near each and every case.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465 |
Quote:
The argument is not "are the laws fair" ..... the question is, did those in prison on drug charges break the laws that were in effect at the time of their arrest/trial/conviction?
The question was 'which causes more harm to society - drug users or alcohol users?'
I gave my opinion that the unfair drug laws were more of a detriment to society than the drug users.
No one is arguing that they're not where they are because of conscious choices.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,419
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,419 |
I honestly don't know. You have to add in all of the violent crime associated with drug dealing ...... the crime associated with those addicted to high dollar illegal drugs ...... and so on.
Alcohol can cause "hidden" damage to families with violent drunks, divorces, and so on.
The fact that one might be bad doesn't make the other better.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,367
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,367 |
Quote:
The fact that one might be bad doesn't make the other better.
The question was posed because one is legal and the other is not. Many of the same reasons given for drugs being illegal are present with alcohol.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Quote:
People can work to change laws and sentencing guidelines that they see as unfair ..... but until and unless it happens .... then it just sucks to be those who chose to break the law.
It sucks to be those who have to pay to keep them there too.
Quote:
Let's face facts here ..... drugs laws are the one type of law that is almost never "accidently" broken. It is absolutely and completely premeditated in damn near each and every case.
I swear officer.. it's NOT MINE!!!!!
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465 |
Quote:
I honestly don't know. You have to add in all of the violent crime associated with drug dealing ...... the crime associated with those addicted to high dollar illegal drugs ...... and so on.
I certainly classify a large difference between violent and non-violent drug offenders.
If you look at the statistics, we're locking up non-violent drug offenders at staggering rates.
That's costing you and I a lot of money.
Quote:
The fact that one might be bad doesn't make the other better.
I'm not arguing whether one is better or worse.
I asked earlier, and I'll ask again ... would you be opposed to a minimum 3 year prison sentence for a D.U.I.?
I ask because ... well, our drug laws make that look lenient.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,825
Legend
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,825 |
Comparing, in the manner you are, a O.V.I. to drug use probably is not an apples to apples comparison. It's not even a good comparison. Alcohol is legal - unless you are over .08 BAC.
Illegal drugs are illegal - period.
I am against a pot smoker going to prison on a first offense, or a second offense. A drug dealer? I have no problem with them being sent to prison.
An O.V.I? First offense (assuming, of course, no accident occurs - that changes things immensely for me) - no, no prison time. Losing your license, paying the fines - perhaps a weekend in jail (around here that's what you get for a first offense) - that's enough.
A second OVI? It gets a little tougher. The amount of time in between also plays a role in that....i.e. 2 ovi's in a year is much worse than 2 in 10 years, for example.
The chronic ovi getter? (someone that has say 10 or so in 10 years, or whatever), yeah, prison. How long? I don't know. Our prisons are full as it is - do we really need to be locking up more people?
And that heads right back to the illegal drugs. There has to be a penalty. Dealers should get much, much harsher penalties - but users should be penalized as well. After all, they are illegal. What penalty for users? I don't know. The guy that smokes a joint here and there shouldn't be hit as hard as the guy that's addicted to crack, pcp, heroin, etc.
Anyway - it seemed like you were trying to compare a dealer's punishment - just or unjust - to a guy that gets an OVI. Bad comparison. (again, assuming there is no injury accident, etc, with the ovi)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,960
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,960 |
Quote:
What penalty for users? I don't know
How about community service? That will benefit society.
President - Fort Collins Browns Backers
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465 |
I agree with this strongly. http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1719872,00.html We write a television show. Measured against more thoughtful and meaningful occupations, this is not the best seat from which to argue public policy or social justice. Still, those viewers who followed The Wire — our HBO drama that tried to portray all sides of inner-city collapse, including the drug war, with as much detail and as little judgment as we could muster — tell us they've invested in the fates of our characters. They worry or grieve for Bubbles, Bodie or Wallace, certain that these characters are fictional yet knowing they are rooted in the reality of the other America, the one rarely acknowledged by anything so overt as a TV drama. These viewers, admittedly a small shard of the TV universe, deluge us with one question: What can we do? If there are two Americas — separate and unequal — and if the drug war has helped produce a psychic chasm between them, how can well-meaning, well-intentioned people begin to bridge those worlds? And for five seasons, we answered lamely, offering arguments about economic priorities or drug policy, debating theoreticals within our tangled little drama. We were storytellers, not advocates; we ducked the question as best we could. Yet this war grinds on, flooding our prisons, devouring resources, turning city neighborhoods into free-fire zones. To what end? State and federal prisons are packed with victims of the drug conflict. A new report by the Pew Center shows that 1 of every 100 adults in the U.S. — and 1 in 15 black men over 18 — is currently incarcerated. That's the world's highest rate of imprisonment. The drug war has ravaged law enforcement too. In cities where police agencies commit the most resources to arresting their way out of their drug problems, the arrest rates for violent crime — murder, rape, aggravated assault — have declined. In Baltimore, where we set The Wire, drug arrests have skyrocketed over the past three decades, yet in that same span, arrest rates for murder have gone from 80% and 90% to half that. Lost in an unwinnable drug war, a new generation of law officers is no longer capable of investigating crime properly, having learned only to make court pay by grabbing cheap, meaningless drug arrests off the nearest corner. What the drugs themselves have not destroyed, the warfare against them has. And what once began, perhaps, as a battle against dangerous substances long ago transformed itself into a venal war on our underclass. Since declaring war on drugs nearly 40 years ago, we've been demonizing our most desperate citizens, isolating and incarcerating them and otherwise denying them a role in the American collective. All to no purpose. The prison population doubles and doubles again; the drugs remain. Our leaders? There aren't any politicians — Democrat or Republican — willing to speak truth on this. Instead, politicians compete to prove themselves more draconian than thou, to embrace America's most profound and enduring policy failure. "A long habit of not thinking a thing wrong, gives it a superficial appearance of being right," wrote Thomas Paine when he called for civil disobedience against monarchy — the flawed national policy of his day. In a similar spirit, we offer a small idea that is, perhaps, no small idea. It will not solve the drug problem, nor will it heal all civic wounds. It does not yet address questions of how the resources spent warring with our poor over drug use might be better spent on treatment or education or job training, or anything else that might begin to restore those places in America where the only economic engine remaining is the illegal drug economy. It doesn't resolve the myriad complexities that a retreat from war to sanity will require. All it does is open a range of intricate, paradoxical issues. But this is what we can do — and what we will do.
If asked to serve on a jury deliberating a violation of state or federal drug laws, we will vote to acquit, regardless of the evidence presented. Save for a prosecution in which acts of violence or intended violence are alleged, we will — to borrow Justice Harry Blackmun's manifesto against the death penalty — no longer tinker with the machinery of the drug war. No longer can we collaborate with a government that uses nonviolent drug offenses to fill prisons with its poorest, most damaged and most desperate citizens. Jury nullification is American dissent, as old and as heralded as the 1735 trial of John Peter Zenger, who was acquitted of seditious libel against the royal governor of New York, and absent a government capable of repairing injustices, it is legitimate protest. If some few episodes of a television entertainment have caused others to reflect on the war zones we have created in our cities and the human beings stranded there, we ask that those people might also consider their conscience. And when the lawyers or the judge or your fellow jurors seek explanation, think for a moment on Bubbles or Bodie or Wallace. And remember that the lives being held in the balance aren't fictional.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,419
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,419 |
So this is another case of "We disagree with the law, and rather than work to change the law, we will willfully disregard the law no matter who it hurts."
I wonder how one of the morons who signs on to this idiocy would feel if they did such a thing, and the thug the acquitted went on to murder their spouse the following week?
If you want laws changed, there are ways of going about doing so. Stupidity isn't one of the legitimate ways.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,825
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,825 |
So, you agree with not upholding the law? The "I don't like the law, so I won't obey it" mentality? Is that what you are saying?
Perhaps there would be a better way to go about it - like working to have the law changed, as opposed to just ignoring it.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 4,458
Hall of Famer
|
|
OP
Hall of Famer
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 4,458 |
Quote:
The "I don't like the law, so I won't obey it" mentality?
Its a sound practice actually......civil disobedience; it worked for Rosa Parks and helped end segregation...
In fact, I believe that those participating in the civil rights movement didn't obey a lot of things.....and it brought about change....
Seeing as though most revolutionary changes don't happen at the ballot box, I tend to think that disobeying laws that are unjust is an effective way to eventually change those laws.
In a lot of ways, ignoring the law is working to change the law....especially if the status quo refuse to acknowledge your position...
And for that other poster, I am not a "troll" or a "yahoo" as you have said in the past. And name-calling isn't really acceptable around here, just an fyi.........I don't make the rules, but you should probably follow them, for Arch's sake....
I wish to wash my Irish wristwatch......
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465 |
Quote:
I wonder how one of the morons who signs on to this idiocy would feel if they did such a thing, and the thug the acquitted went on to murder their spouse the following week?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,419
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,419 |
Yeah ... because drug dealers never murder anyone ......... Or drug addicts, for that matter. Just what world do you live in anyway? Here in Youngstown, there are drug related murders all the time. Even murders that aren't directly drug related often have a drug related background story. I suppose that it's different in your utopian dreamland .... but that isn't the real world.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465 |
Quote:
Just what world do you live in anyway?
I'd like to ask the same question.
YTown changed my mind, folks. We need to make sure we lock up non-violent drug offenders to keep them from murdering their spouses.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,419
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,419 |
Your article said that they will vote to acquit in every case, except those of violence and/or intended violence.
So ..... if someone "just" steals to support a habit ..... you must acquit. If someone has been caught with an enormous amount of drugs for sale ..... with the violence that tends to go along with such a profession ..... if they were not caught in the commission of an act of violence .... you much acquit.
Ridiculous.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465 |
Quote:
So ..... if someone "just" steals to support a habit ..... you must acquit.
That would be a charge of theft, in which case their stated thesis wouldn't apply.
But we should watch out for the thieves ... they could kill their spouses.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,419
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,419 |
Hypothetical:
A man goes to trial for trying to buy 5 kilos of cocaine from an undercover agent.
How do you vote if you are on the jury? No violence ..... just a massive drug buy.
Not a hypotetical person though .... how do YOU vote?
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,419
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,419 |
Quote:
Quote:
So ..... if someone "just" steals to support a habit ..... you must acquit.
That would be a charge of theft, in which case their stated thesis wouldn't apply.
But we should watch out for the thieves ... they could kill their spouses.
Oh, and I think that you misunderstood my point. What if the jury member voted to acquit ..... and the drug user they acquitted robbed the jury member's home, and killed his/her spouse and/or family in the commission of that robbery?
I know that never ever happens in your world ..... that drug users rob people, and that people die when being robbed ...... but let's play in my "fantasy" world for a while, shall we?
If that were to happen .... then who would be to blame? Who would be at fault?
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465 |
Quote:
Oh, and I think that you misunderstood my point. What if the jury member voted to acquit ..... and the drug user they acquitted robbed the jury member's home, and killed his/her spouse and/or family in the commission of that robbery?
Are you freaking serious? I thought you might realize the silliness of your earlier post and try to clarify ... but then you go ahead and ask an even dumber question.
Are you really asking 'what if someone acquitted of a non-violent drug offense turns around and robs and kills the spouse of someone who sat on their jury'?
Is that your question? Honestly?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Quote:
Quote:
The "I don't like the law, so I won't obey it" mentality?
Its a sound practice actually......civil disobedience; it worked for Rosa Parks and helped end segregation...
In fact, I believe that those participating in the civil rights movement didn't obey a lot of things.....and it brought about change....
Seeing as though most revolutionary changes don't happen at the ballot box, I tend to think that disobeying laws that are unjust is an effective way to eventually change those laws.
In a lot of ways, ignoring the law is working to change the law....especially if the status quo refuse to acknowledge your position...
And for that other poster, I am not a "troll" or a "yahoo" as you have said in the past. And name-calling isn't really acceptable around here, just an fyi.........I don't make the rules, but you should probably follow them, for Arch's sake....
What the article is asking for is far more serious than a black woman refusing to move on the bus or a group of protestors blocking traffic.. the article is advocating jury tampering.. the article is advocating that a jury collectively discuss and agree to a verdict BEFORE the case is even heard simply based on what the charge is and whether you agree to it politically... That might be the dumbest way I've ever heard to attack a problem.... maybe we should just get the guards together and just have them let all non-violent drug offenders go... you know, just leave the gate open one night and let them go hang out in the yard...
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,419
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,419 |
Quote:
Quote:
Oh, and I think that you misunderstood my point. What if the jury member voted to acquit ..... and the drug user they acquitted robbed the jury member's home, and killed his/her spouse and/or family in the commission of that robbery?
Are you freaking serious? I thought you might realize the silliness of your earlier post and try to clarify ... but then you go ahead and ask an even dumber question.
Are you really asking 'what if someone acquitted of a non-violent drug offense turns around and robs and kills the spouse of someone who sat on their jury'?
Is that your question? Honestly?
That is exactly my question.
What if a guy gets busted trying to buy 10 kilos of cocaine. The "good people" of your organization decide to acquit him because he's "non-violent". The next day ..... as so often happens in the real drug world ..... someone opens fire on someone else, and people die as a direct result of the acquitted person's actiona.
In such as case, are you, as a juror in that initial jury, under those not so far-fetched circumstances, are you now an accessory to murder because of your actions?
I know that in whatever world you live in these types of things never happen ..... but people die quite frequently in Youngstown ..... generally as a result of drug related murder, gang related (drugs) murder, or robberies gone bad. You may want to pretend that it never happens, and maybe I can have you come explain to the people who lost their loved ones as a result of such activities that the drugs really weren't at fault. I can think of at least 4 different kids who worked for me who have been affected by crimes of these sort against members of their families. One of them was a drug deal gone bad where the wrong damn house got shot up.
Yeah ... drugs and the dealers/users are freakin' non violent saints.
Bull. hardcore drug users can be as ruthless as anyone on this planet. Hardcore drug dealers can be more ruthless than any 3rd world dictator. Many of them may never get caught committing acts of violence, because they have other people do it for them .... and those people know better than to roll over on them.
However, go back to your "drugs are fine and dandy fantasy world. Go back to believing that drugs never hurt anyone. Go back to believing that it's only because we have laws against drugs that make them a problem.
Maybe pot smokers aren't going to go crazy on anyone ..... but Heroin? Cocaine? Prescription drug thiefs? Really? None of them are on a pathway to destruction that may not include violence today, but is more than likely to include crime and violence in the future? Are you really, really that blind to the real world?
Must be nice living in a world where facts, and lives, and deaths are absolutely meaningless.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums DawgTalk K-9 Consensus Doper Poll
|
|
