 | | Drugs and guns
|
|
In light of the recent gun debate here, I thought that it might be ok to ask your thoughts on banning narcotics in America, afterall, they have had a dramatic negative impact on our society and getting the drugs off the legal market would certainly (...) (23 years ago, 18-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Drugs and guns
|
|
(...) Hmm. Yes. All that drug related violence. All those people resorting to violent crime to fund their habit, and the ensuing deaths where innocent bystanders have small bags of white powder thrown at them with sufficient force to cause gaping (...) (23 years ago, 18-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Drugs and guns
|
|
Hmm...I'm not sure if you are being sarcastic directly with me or if you were merely adding more humor... If, perchance, you missed my meaning here, purhaps I can clear it up a bit... Making guns illegal will only make things worse. Narcotics were (...) (23 years ago, 19-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Drugs and guns
|
|
(...) I don't think it was humor. I think he was being snotty. (...) Only if you consider a national bloodbath and endless guerilla war "bad." :-) (...) Ayup! And you know why we won't end the war on drugs? Because the police support it. You know (...) (23 years ago, 19-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Drugs and guns
|
|
I don't post much here, but I'd like to say that the criminal will always find a way to obtain firearms, regardless if the society in which he lives has banned them. As for banning firarms themselves? We must remember that one of Adolf Hitler's (...) (23 years ago, 19-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Drugs and guns
|
|
(...) RICO. I think it is "Racketeering Influenced Corrupt Organizations" or something close to that. It's a great little law if you also like civil forfeiture... (23 years ago, 19-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Drugs and guns
|
|
(...) I was replying in kind. Take it as you please, but I wasn't the first. My point was that it's a bad analogy because even with narcotic/alcohol prohibition, the first thing the criminals do is arm themselves. (...) Ah - a smiley. Hmm. Why am I (...) (23 years ago, 19-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Drugs and guns
|
|
(...) :-) (...) The smiley was meant (though obviously unsuccessfully) to point to my silly irony and indicate that such a result would _not_ be the best possible outcome. But I do think that it would be the outcome of a gun ban in the US. And I (...) (23 years ago, 19-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Drugs and guns
|
|
(...) While the health problems may be relatively inexpensive (though I don't believe it to be so), the heath costs are, I think, considerably smaller than the longterm impact upon productivity. Opponents might point to tobacco, caffeine, and (...) (23 years ago, 19-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Drugs and guns
|
|
(...) And it's pretty closely related to two other gems: the use of conspiracy laws beyond cases involving treason (previously providing the only use of conspiracy laws), and the use of testimony bought with bargained for punishment agreements. (...) (23 years ago, 19-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Drugs and guns
|
|
(...) Very concise! Y'all can talk about these issues until everyone is blue in the face (or at least blue in the typing fingers...) but in the United States we have de facto guns and drugs in the hands of anyone wanting them. Yes, we have laws and (...) (23 years ago, 19-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
