 | | Re: If you oppose drug legalization, you support terrorism!
|
|
(...) Not really-- essentially you want a good mix of various products, not all of them physical. In order to graduate from being a 3rd world country, I expect they'd need other profitable areas... not just a single product like cocoa or cigars or (...) (23 years ago, 6-Feb-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: If you oppose drug legalization, you support terrorism!
|
|
(...) You mean like coffee and cocoa? Well they're certainly getting my support, as I start each morning with a pot of 100% Columbian-- and I sometimes have chocolate at breakfast. (...) It seems to me any distinction made between the goods we find (...) (23 years ago, 6-Feb-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: If you oppose drug legalization, you support terrorism!
|
|
(...) I'd say the truth is that legalization isn't associable. It might be more correct to say that if you support illegal drug use, you support terrorism, albeit inderectly. Whether or not its legalization would change the terrorist state isn't (...) (23 years ago, 5-Feb-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Copyright/Fair use question
|
|
(...) You are no longer complying with fair use if you have sold the original. You should destroy it or pass it along with the original to the new owner. Bruce (23 years ago, 5-Feb-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Copyright/Fair use question
|
|
(...) Probably from an absolute standpoint, you would be required to destroy it. I can't see that anyone would be upset if you gave it with the original. (23 years ago, 5-Feb-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Copyright/Fair use question
|
|
Lately I've been lightheartedly condemning a coworker for his habit of signing CD's out of the local library, burning copies of them, and returning the originals, all without paying a cent to the copyright owner, of course. But in considering a (...) (23 years ago, 5-Feb-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: left-leaning pantywaists in Britain (Re: So are they prisoners of war or what?)
|
|
(...) I thought that Walker was charged with acting against coalition forces in Afghanistan – not involvement in the events of 11.09.01? (...) That was my understanding. (...) Given that his change of sides was so complete, I must admit it did (...) (23 years ago, 5-Feb-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: If you oppose drug legalization, you support terrorism!
|
|
(...) I certainly agree that taxes can get outta hand and in this case, overtaxing would defeat the point of legalizing. Bruce (23 years ago, 5-Feb-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: If you oppose drug legalization, you support terrorism!
|
|
(...) Yeah. After I sent that, I didn't like the way I'd worded it. (...) Sure! So things in general should be set up to motivate people to do good, or not motivate them at all and let their inherent goodness rise to the surface. (...) or (...) (...) (23 years ago, 5-Feb-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: If you oppose drug legalization, you support terrorism!
|
|
(...) Or, more accurately, above the price it would be if legal. (...) People are also motivated to be 'good' when it is highly profitable. (...) That terror may well subside. Doesn't mean it won't be replaced by other kinds of 'badness'. These guys (...) (23 years ago, 5-Feb-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: If you oppose drug legalization, you support terrorism!
|
|
(...) Not so much now, as when they were at the ~50 cdn/carton level. (I don't care, since I don't smoke) As long as it is cheaper/easier to get them legally, then most people will do so. But, I can remember seeing _lots_ of DMK packs (DuMàurier (...) (23 years ago, 5-Feb-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: left-leaning pantywaists in Britain (Re: So are they prisoners of war or what?)
|
|
(...) The UK detainees are still different from Walker. The current action in Afghanistan is a direct reaction to an attack on US soil. This Walker is alleged to have treasoned against the US, the UK detainees are just non Afghans, just like the (...) (23 years ago, 5-Feb-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: If you oppose drug legalization, you support terrorism!
|
|
(...) My gut feel is that for a while the violence would continue as those currently in positions of power because of the current system attempted to maintain those positions. Eventually they would be unable to maintain their positions. (...) My (...) (23 years ago, 5-Feb-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: If you oppose drug legalization, you support terrorism!
|
|
(...) Don't forget, you can't tax it TOO high or it won't work... people will bootleg it. I hear cigs in Canada are getting to that point, people smuggle them in. (23 years ago, 5-Feb-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Does it pay to be a Patriot?
|
|
(...) Well, they certainly want to be freemen, one of the 22 enumerated statuses of persons in the U.S. Constitution, and that is a worthy goal. But... Patriots, as both you and the govt. call them, are probably a very misunderstood group. Many of (...) (23 years ago, 5-Feb-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Does it pay to be a Patriot?
|
|
(...) Hah, hah. (23 years ago, 5-Feb-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Does it pay to be a Patriot?
|
|
(...) Dunno, but I'm optimistic they'll win in the end - by a field goal in the dying seconds! ROSCO (23 years ago, 4-Feb-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Tanks at the Super Bowl
|
|
(...) What *are* the present security measures? Are they that intrusive? And isn't it the best way to prevent weapons/bombs in planes to "kill" the will to bring 'em? By hitting *the source*? If nobody wants to take a bomb to the plane, nobody will. (...) (23 years ago, 4-Feb-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Does it pay to be a Patriot?
|
|
I've been reading a lot about supposed infringements on civil liberties lately. It doesn't require a significant search to find a site highlighting an "infringement" that most citizens are ignorant of. I find much of the subject matter to be over my (...) (23 years ago, 4-Feb-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Tanks at the Super Bowl
|
|
(...) Not really. It would be disturbing if this were standard procedure in peace time (let's not forget "W" declared war against unknown targets). Or if it kept occurring forever, under the excuse "The war is long, and the end is unforseeble (...) (23 years ago, 4-Feb-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
