well that sounds nice except that history teaches us that warmongers often come out on top in civil wars and continue the carnage abroad after consolidating power
it's moral for me to decide what people to with their bodies when i am forced to pay for their feeding and housing and healthcare when they destroy their lives with said substances
if substance abuse happened in a vacuum, it would be fine. but it does not. it has costs to society. this gives society the right to get involved
that being said, healthcare solutions are the proper approach to addiction, not jails
and nonaddictive substances like marijuana should be legal
but the people who sell the addictive substances like heroin, meth, and coke need hard jail time, for the costs their trade incurs on society
there are plenty of things that a market exists for that are immoral
plutonium. child sex slaves. ricin. RPGs
just because a market exists for something does not justify it
you may say that you can't shut a market down, it will just go underground
yeah, and making rape, murder, and robbery illegal hasn't stopped them either. but we still do not legalize or accept rape, murder, or robbery
some things civilization will always be at war with. permanently
it's simply a maintenance function
you yourself are involved with a "war on trash". if you take out the trash once, do you never have to take out the trash again? no, you have to take it out every thursday, or it accumulates and your house becomes unlivable
because you can't take out the trash once and be done with it, you stop taking out the trash altogether? because you can't guarantee 100% no trash in your apartment you must accept high levels on unlivable filth?
no. you minimize it. as a constant function. trash will always be there. and a constant effort at minimization is the best you can do
and that's completely ok. and normal
and so it is with "the war on {X}"
simply because you can't stop it, that all you can do is minimize it, is no argument against the effort
for the simple reason that just because something is possible, doesn't mean we accept it
the concept you are missing in your thinking is called right and wrong
and if you form a world view without the concept of morality, your world view will fail and has no validity
the lack of transparency is a catastrophe for the future of this country
in history books they will write that the post-9/11 mandate of the nsa was the end of the usa, for it truly betrays the country's principles in stunningly vile fashion
next comes the corruption and the manipulation on a controlling level, it's already started at an ad hoc level
a writ of assistance is just as much of an abuse as what the NSA does
disgust with the writs of assistance was a genuine grievance and a genuine motivating factor in the founding of this country
so conceptually, the mandate of the NSA is a direct contradiction to a foundational concept of the usa
the difference?
a writ of assistance involves some rude assholes barging into your life and your business and messing up your stuff
meanwhile, what the NSA does is secret, quiet, and unseen
the difference between something invisible and in your face is all the difference in the world, even if it is the same abuse
but eventually, the negative effects will accumulate
extremely vile and unpleasant abuses will occur as the power of the NSA grows. selling information about a candidate or government official for blackmail purposes for example. that judge making that important decision on that coal power plant? blackmail him. that candidate that might spring the balance of power democratic or republican? blackmail him
with 100% certainty this abuse will happen, if it is not happening already. power and corruption and secret dealings: can't be helped, it's inevitable. only transparency prevents corruption, and the NSA is opaque by design, so corruption is a certainty
only then will the outcry reverse these growing NSA tentacles
the problem is, at that point, since they will know everything, will any resistance be effective enough?
because some people don't get the difference between decriminalization and illegality
portugal is very much invested in the war on hard drugs, but with far better tactics than the usa: treat it as a healthcare problem, not a jail problem
In July 2001 a new law maintained the status of illegality for using or possessing any drug for personal use without authorization. The offense was changed from a criminal one, with prison a possible punishment, to an administrative one if the amount possessed was no more than ten days' supply of that substance.[1] This was in line with the de facto Portuguese drug policy before the reform. Drug addicts were then to be aggressively targeted with therapy or community service rather than fines or waivers.[7] Even if there are no criminal penalties, these changes did not legalize drug use in Portugal. Possession has remained prohibited by Portuguese law, and criminal penalties are still applied to drug growers, dealers and traffickers.[8][9]
hard drug addicts represent a cost on society and civilization will always be at war with hard drug abuse, forever, in an attempt to minimize this cost
it is merely a maintenance function of society, this war. you need to take the trash out ever thursday: this is your "war on trash." because "the war on trash" never ends, is that an argument to let trash accumulate in your apartment?
no, taking out the trash is merely a maintenance function of your apartment. just like minimizing drug addicts is a maintenance function of society
portugal is still at war with hard drugs, as is every functional society on earth. forever
portugal just has much better tactics in this maintenance function
Slashdot Mirror
propaganda is never made up. it's always truth
or rather, half-truth
completely true statements, with context and certain facts omitted, so as to suggest something else entirely
there is never a need to lie. just carefully omit certain facts
well that sounds nice except that history teaches us that warmongers often come out on top in civil wars and continue the carnage abroad after consolidating power
perhaps not the best marketing terminology for a vehicle, in that area of the world
Cocaine isn't chemically addictive.
i stopped reading there
you're a moron
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GoldenEye
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Die_Another_Day
there is nothing good that can come from civilian possession of plutonium, and plenty bad, whether intentionally or unintentionally
there is nothing remotely comparable to plutonium that you can do with crude oil in terms of threats to the general populace
all i can think is that perhaps you share this guy's view on tinkering with radioactive substances in civilian settings:
http://www.dangerouslaboratories.org/radscout.html
since this poor fellow is clearly insane, there is nothing more to say on the subject
intolerance of intolerance is not the same thing as intolerance itself
and there are laws about alcohol's use
would you support a law saying LSD/ psilocybin/ other psychedelic use is legal, as long as you have a responsible sober babysitter?
i would
"If someone wants to use drugs and walk out a window that is their business."
it never is that simple, is it?
if everyone used psychedelics like LSD and psilocybin responsibly (get a babysitter) they would be legal
but as it is, people walk out windows when using psychedelics alone
use a babysitter when you use a psychedelic
or you are one of the reasons why these drugs are illegal
irresponsibility is the reason laws exist
in a world where everyone acted responsibly, there would be no need for laws
freedom has never meant "i can do whatever the hell i want without regard to the consequences"
it's moral for me to decide what people to with their bodies when i am forced to pay for their feeding and housing and healthcare when they destroy their lives with said substances
if substance abuse happened in a vacuum, it would be fine. but it does not. it has costs to society. this gives society the right to get involved
that being said, healthcare solutions are the proper approach to addiction, not jails
and nonaddictive substances like marijuana should be legal
but the people who sell the addictive substances like heroin, meth, and coke need hard jail time, for the costs their trade incurs on society
there are plenty of things that a market exists for that are immoral
plutonium. child sex slaves. ricin. RPGs
just because a market exists for something does not justify it
you may say that you can't shut a market down, it will just go underground
yeah, and making rape, murder, and robbery illegal hasn't stopped them either. but we still do not legalize or accept rape, murder, or robbery
some things civilization will always be at war with. permanently
it's simply a maintenance function
you yourself are involved with a "war on trash". if you take out the trash once, do you never have to take out the trash again? no, you have to take it out every thursday, or it accumulates and your house becomes unlivable
because you can't take out the trash once and be done with it, you stop taking out the trash altogether? because you can't guarantee 100% no trash in your apartment you must accept high levels on unlivable filth?
no. you minimize it. as a constant function. trash will always be there. and a constant effort at minimization is the best you can do
and that's completely ok. and normal
and so it is with "the war on {X}"
simply because you can't stop it, that all you can do is minimize it, is no argument against the effort
for the simple reason that just because something is possible, doesn't mean we accept it
the concept you are missing in your thinking is called right and wrong
and if you form a world view without the concept of morality, your world view will fail and has no validity
the topic adequacy police has spoken
we have to move on now
delete your comments and find a new topic
if the anonymous coward disapproves again, you need to abandon that thread too
i'm sorry folks, but the anonymous topic adequacy police is in charge here, we all know that
any tactic that depends upon your enemy being stupid is doomed to backfire
yup
the lack of transparency is a catastrophe for the future of this country
in history books they will write that the post-9/11 mandate of the nsa was the end of the usa, for it truly betrays the country's principles in stunningly vile fashion
next comes the corruption and the manipulation on a controlling level, it's already started at an ad hoc level
the origins of the 4th amendment are these:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Writ_of_assistance
a writ of assistance is just as much of an abuse as what the NSA does
disgust with the writs of assistance was a genuine grievance and a genuine motivating factor in the founding of this country
so conceptually, the mandate of the NSA is a direct contradiction to a foundational concept of the usa
the difference?
a writ of assistance involves some rude assholes barging into your life and your business and messing up your stuff
meanwhile, what the NSA does is secret, quiet, and unseen
the difference between something invisible and in your face is all the difference in the world, even if it is the same abuse
but eventually, the negative effects will accumulate
extremely vile and unpleasant abuses will occur as the power of the NSA grows. selling information about a candidate or government official for blackmail purposes for example. that judge making that important decision on that coal power plant? blackmail him. that candidate that might spring the balance of power democratic or republican? blackmail him
with 100% certainty this abuse will happen, if it is not happening already. power and corruption and secret dealings: can't be helped, it's inevitable. only transparency prevents corruption, and the NSA is opaque by design, so corruption is a certainty
only then will the outcry reverse these growing NSA tentacles
the problem is, at that point, since they will know everything, will any resistance be effective enough?
Mr Fusion was based on the 1980s era kitchen appliance brand Mr Coffee
This is 2013 so we would have to call it the Keurig Fusion
#27,315 of the collusional and oligarchic things that happen in real life that libertarians won't admit to when they enthuse about their ideology
apparently the free market regulates itself, and consumer choice takes care of problems like this. seriously?
why do people believe this free market fundamentalism nonsense?
simple fact: a market needs to be heavily regulated by a strong central govt, or small competitors get crushed and consumers get abused
wake up fanboys
But that's just how it goes if you wanna store an assload of clean energy in a small enough space to power a vehicle.
that's just how it goes if you want to store an assload of ANY KIND of energy in a small enough space
it's on fire, so it's a hot item
you have a right to fight for your passions
but if your passion is to defund badly needed healthcare reform, you're wrong
and you will lose
"private road operator"?!
you are insane if you do not understand that society's rules trumps that
yes, consider alcohol, and consider that the costs of prohibition are greater than the costs of the drug itself
then consider meth, and consider that the costs of the drug itself are greater than the costs of prohibition
each drug is different. each drug deserves its own legal status quo
to think the same drug policy can apply to all drugs is ignorant of the subject matter
the costs of the drug war is less than the costs of hard drugs themselves, on individuals and society
consider a drug like meth
consider the costs, of the drug itself
weigh that against the costs you mention
because some people don't get the difference between decriminalization and illegality
portugal is very much invested in the war on hard drugs, but with far better tactics than the usa: treat it as a healthcare problem, not a jail problem
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drug_policy_of_Portugal
hard drug addicts represent a cost on society and civilization will always be at war with hard drug abuse, forever, in an attempt to minimize this cost
it is merely a maintenance function of society, this war. you need to take the trash out ever thursday: this is your "war on trash." because "the war on trash" never ends, is that an argument to let trash accumulate in your apartment?
no, taking out the trash is merely a maintenance function of your apartment. just like minimizing drug addicts is a maintenance function of society
portugal is still at war with hard drugs, as is every functional society on earth. forever
portugal just has much better tactics in this maintenance function