DEBATE: if alcohol is legal, why shouldn't marijuana be?

Taft2016 said:
I think we can win by by applying some real-life penalties with teeth in them.... cancellation of welfare bennies would be a superb start. The sort of things needed to win are just the sort of things you liberals will never allow.

Here's a small tale from here in the big city. NYC is trying to fill a bunch of school crossing guard positions in the poorest neighborhoods here. It's a part-time job that pays about $13 an hour, but provides full benefits. The job basically entails waking up, going down to a corner a block or two away, crossing some school children safely, and returning back at the end of the day to do the same thing at dismissal.

Why can't NYC fill these highly publicized vacancies? Which, btw, offer the optimal convenience for single mothers... you'd be off from work when your kids are off from school...

The answer is that there are not enough applicants passing the entry-level drug test...
Click to expand...

It pays $9.88 to start and the benes don't kick in until they get 20+ hours. It's a pretty shifty job. Do you have a source for these claims about failed drug tests?

But, see it seems the drug war is stopping people from gaining jobs again. Yeah, we can't limit welfare until that is corrected.
 
Hasa Diga Eebowai said:
There is no connection. If there is any its that the drug war creates a burden for those seeking work after an arrest, destroys what would be a job providing market and the spending drains the economy. As a small government guy I think we are going to have to end the drug war before we consider changes to welfare. Horse always goes before the cart.
Click to expand...

But what about the war on DUI's? Doesn't this also create a burden for those seeking work after an arrest, destroying what would be a job providing market and the spending drains the economy. As a small government guy, shouldn't you also be thinking that we have to end the war on DUI's be fore we consider changes to welfare? Doesn't that horse also deserve a chance to be in front of the cart?
 
Right said:
OK. But why can't you admit that you fucked up solely because of one person: you. Instead you blame me. Then you claim you don't give a fuck...
Click to expand...

It is not my fault that you are an asshole who cannot be reasoned with. How hard is that to understand?
 
Rune said:
It is not my fault that you are an asshole who cannot be reasoned with. How hard is that to understand?
Click to expand...
I am perfectly reasonable. What is unreasonable is you, claiming to win all debates yet failing to admit even simple mistakes.
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
But what about the war on DUI's? Doesn't this also create a burden for those seeking work after an arrest, destroying what would be a job providing market and the spending drains the economy. As a small government guy, shouldn't you also be thinking that we have to end the war on DUI's be fore we consider changes to welfare? Doesn't that horse also deserve a chance to be in front of the cart?
Click to expand...

DUI's are an actual crime. What market is there for a dui industry? Most of the enforcement is covered by the routine enforcement of the traffic laws and doesn't add to the burden.

I do support some change in DUI laws. That is, I think you should have had to demonstrate some impairment in the ability to drive not just be over the limit.

But okay, yeah let's obstruct change in an unrelated area, welfare, until we get those changes. Thanks for helping to prove how silly and dishonest Taft's premise is.
 
Hasa Diga Eebowai said:
1 - DUI's are an actual crime. What market is there for a dui industry? Most of the enforcement is covered by the routine enforcement of the traffic laws and doesn't add to the burden.

2 - I do support some change in DUI laws. That is, I think you should have had to demonstrate some impairment in the ability to drive not just be over the limit.

3 - But okay, yeah let's obstruct change in an unrelated area, welfare, until we get those changes. Thanks for helping to prove how silly and dishonest Taft's premise is.
Click to expand...

1 - MJ usage is also a crime, at this time and you seem to be ignoring DUI check points, in regard to the cost.

2 - What guidelines do you think should be used, to determine "impairment"?

3 - How is it unrelated, when the results of such convictions create barriers to what you were complaining about.

Why did you completely avoid the resulting consequences that affect both situations?
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
1 - MJ usage is also a crime, at this time and you seem to be ignoring DUI check points, in regard to the cost.

2 - What guidelines do you think should be used, to determine "impairment"?

3 - How is it unrelated, when the results of such convictions create barriers to what you were complaining about.

Why did you completely avoid the resulting consequences that affect both situations?
Click to expand...

Mj use is not a real crime, ie, there is no victim or injured party.

You don't have a right to use the roads and your use of them is subject to various rules, one of which drunk driving violates. The state has a valid interest related to dui laws, none in the enforcement of drug laws. It is just a tyrannical use of government force.

Swerving, demonstrating an inability to drive safely.

Welfare is unrelated to dui laws or drug laws.

What consequences?

You made your point, Taft is a dishonest hack who starts with where he wants to get, maintaining the illegality of drugs, and then searches for some way to rationalize it.
 
Hasa Diga Eebowai said:
1 - Mj use is not a real crime, ie, there is no victim or injured party.

2 - You don't have a right to use the roads and your use of them is subject to various rules, one of which drunk driving violates. The state has a valid interest related to dui laws, none in the enforcement of drug laws. It is just a tyrannical use of government force.

3 - Swerving, demonstrating an inability to drive safely.

4 - Welfare is unrelated to dui laws or drug laws.

5 - What consequences?

6 - You made your point, Taft is a dishonest hack who starts with where he wants to get, maintaining the illegality of drugs, and then searches for some way to rationalize it.
Click to expand...

1 - You might want to go and explain that to all the people serving time and the Attorneys who prosecuted them.

2 - Are you suggesting that people who smoke MJ don't drive while under the influence?

3 - So people who smoke, don't swerve?

4 - But it still affects their ability, regarding employment and earnings.

5 - People charged with DUI's have to go to court and face the possibility of fines and being incarcerated.

6 - I never said a word supporting or condemning Taft, no matter how eager you are to try and make it appear so.
 
Hasa Diga Eebowai said:
Do you inderstand what the word most means? The cost of Dui check points is rather small in comparison to the drug war, but as I indicated I am not in favor of that sort of enforcement.
Click to expand...

But you admit that it is a cost, no matter what the resulting difference is.
So we should do away with DUI laws?
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
1 - You might want to go and explain that to all the people serving time and the Attorneys who prosecuted them.

2 - Are you suggesting that people who smoke MJ don't drive while under the influence?

3 - So people who smoke, don't swerve?

4 - But it still affects their ability, regarding employment and earnings.

5 - People charged with DUI's have to go to court and face the possibility of fines and being incarcerated.

6 - I never said a word supporting or condemning Taft, no matter how eager you are to try and make it appear so.
Click to expand...

Non repsonsive. The fact that someone may be incarcerated has nothing to do with any of my points.

We are not talking about whether a law against driving under the influence of mj is valid.

Prove there is a relation to their ability to work. But, that is their business not the state's.

Yeah, your point seemed to be that we cant change welfare laws without getting rid of dui laws. I assumed you meant that sarcastically to make the point that Taft's unrelated caveat is silly.
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
But you admit that it is a cost, no matter what the resulting difference is.
So we should do away with DUI laws?
Click to expand...

Of course, there is some cost involved in enforcing dui laws. What level of moron are you exactly? But most of the cost is already sunk into the enforcement of traffic laws. The burden created by the drug war is not similar and far higher.

The cost is not the only issue. You are dropping the context as usual.
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
But what about the war on DUI's? Doesn't this also create a burden for those seeking work after an arrest, destroying what would be a job providing market and the spending drains the economy. As a small government guy, shouldn't you also be thinking that we have to end the war on DUI's be fore we consider changes to welfare? Doesn't that horse also deserve a chance to be in front of the cart?
Click to expand...

What war on DUI?
Pot is legal plenty of states.
Why do you ihate state's rights?
 
Hasa Diga Eebowai said:
1 - Non repsonsive. The fact that someone may be incarcerated has nothing to do with any of my points.

2 - We are not talking about whether a law against driving under the influence of mj is valid.

3 - Prove there is a relation to their ability to work. But, that is their business not the state's.

4 - Yeah, your point seemed to be that we cant change welfare laws without getting rid of dui laws. I assumed you meant that sarcastically to make the point that Taft's unrelated caveat is silly.
Click to expand...

1 - So you're now saying that you didn't post:

Hasa Diga Eebowai said:
Mj use is not a real crime...
Click to expand...

2 - Scares you; HUH!

3 - If they fail the drug test, then they won't have a job.

4 - Don't believe I ever said that; but you are free to make another attempt.
 
Hasa Diga Eebowai said:
Of course, there is some cost involved in enforcing dui laws. What level of moron are you exactly? But most of the cost is already sunk into the enforcement of traffic laws. The burden created by the drug war is not similar and far higher.

The cost is not the only issue. You are dropping the context as usual.
Click to expand...

At least you're willing to admit that the DUI check points cost the public money and someone else mentioned that they result in a very small return, for the effort.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top