Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Long Island is part of New York, not Pennsylvania. This thread started in the Long Island, NY forum.
Thanks, buddy. What would I do without you?
This thread started in the PENNSYLVANIA forum. It was MOVED to the Long Island forum by a moderator when it ceased being PA-centric and got taken over by people talking about Long Island.
I don't need any more geographical lessons, thank you very much.
Legalize it. It already is decriminalized in many cities, anyway. Nothing good comes from keeping it illegal, it isn't really harmful, and we could put the money, police, and jail space to better uses.
And what explanation would you give, to the families of the dramatically increased number of people who are killed or horribly injured in things like automobile accidents involving newly-legalized intoxicants such as marijuana? Legalize something, and you get more of it. Do you really want more drug use? Would that benefit America?
This thread started in the PENNSYLVANIA forum. It was MOVED to the Long Island forum by a moderator when it ceased being PA-centric and got taken over by people talking about Long Island.
I don't need any more geographical lessons, thank you very much.
You are wrong.
I know the OP of this thread and he started it in the Long Island, New York forum.
the difference is Congress, they Senate and the President work (Sort of). Welfare reciepients sit on theyre butts and play on the computer all day!
I guess the point that was trying to make is that they can get high and make laws to make your life miserable, meanwhile someone on welfare whose inactivity and frustration from not being able to work does not effect you at all.
Not if it became an executable offense and we didn't have levels upon levels of appeals and whatever. If you're caught using drugs, you're caught using drugs... and you're dead. Simple. No lawyers, nothing. The evidence is there. Have your trial by jury if you must, but the jury will see the same thing. Frankly, if you use drugs, you're of no positive value to society anyway.
Oh wait, America will never do that?
Doesn't change the fact that it would be a much quicker and more cost-effective way to improve the American gene pool, and keep pretty much all of those presently not using drugs from ever STARTING using drugs and becoming addicted.
And as for those of you who would attack me for being "intolerant", "closed-minded", "drugophobic" or whatever other wimpy liberal weenie word you can throw at me to make yourself seem more than a screaming mouse, I ask you this: Can YOU come up with anything quicker and more cost-effective? (I'm not interested in what you think is "better". Just give me "quicker" and "more cost-effective" for ridding our society of its drug problem, which naturally trickles down to welfare recipients.)
How about the fact that it could be gene related? Some people are more prone to be addicts than others just like there are more people prone to be alcoholic than others. Do you want to kill them too? What about prescription drugs? I will not call you intolerant, nor close minded I would just simply say that since you are not directly affected by addiction you can care less less. This is very unfortunate for those who want to improve the American gene pool. In order to do this you must have some compassion for those who are suffering in order to make life better for everyone
How about the fact that it could be gene related? Some people are more prone to be addicts than others just like there are more people prone to be alcoholic than others. Do you want to kill them too? What about prescription drugs? I will not call you intolerant, nor close minded I would just simply say that since you are not directly affected by addiction you can care less less. This is very unfortunate for those who want to improve the American gene pool. In order to do this you must have some compassion for those who are suffering in order to make life better for everyone
Then wouldn't the best way to improve the American gene pool be NOT to support addicts/alcoholics who reproduce as a means of supporting themselves instead of working (or who end up with their families on public assistance because their addictions prevent them from working)? We're going to have to take their kids away from them for abuse and neglect anyway in many cases and their kids will carry on the addict genes and the cycle continues on and on and on ...
How about the fact that it could be gene related? Some people are more prone to be addicts than others just like there are more people prone to be alcoholic than others. Do you want to kill them too? What about prescription drugs? I will not call you intolerant, nor close minded I would just simply say that since you are not directly affected by addiction you can care less less. This is very unfortunate for those who want to improve the American gene pool. In order to do this you must have some compassion for those who are suffering in order to make life better for everyone
I understand being prone to addiction. Addiction is all over the place in my family. All four of my grandparents died early due to smoking, and my dad's dad was an alcoholic. My dad is also an alcoholic and my brother hasn't had much luck kicking his tendency to drink. On my mom's side there is drug addiction, alcoholism, prescription pill addiction, etc. If anyone were genetically predisposed to addiction, it'd be me. It could be argued that I'm addicted to food, but no doctor has ever told me that I have any reason to cut back on the amount of food I eat.
The solution to addiction is using your brain. People who don't want to be addicted to things like drugs, cigarettes, alcohol, etc. do not have to be addicted to those things. The addictive substances do not force their way into the person's body... that cigarette doesn't light itself, pop itself into a person's mouth and automatically inflate the person's lungs with smoke. The person has to make a conscious decision to light the cigarette and inhale from it. The same is true about drinking from the bottle, or popping the pill. It is a conscious decision. Are those decisions skewed by "withdrawal"? Sure. But that's where strength has to come into play. If you want to break an addiction, you can break the addiction. If you fail to break the addiction, it is because you have chosen not to break the addiction. People are always in control of their addictions, for that reason.
I never said that I wanted to kill anyone. It is quite the contrary. God put all of us here for a reason... what I really want to see is people doing what God intends for them to do. However, you have to admit that if drug use and sale were made executable offenses, we would have a lot less of it. When we subsidize drugs by providing government money to people who spend it on drugs, all we get is more drug use... which sucks money from government coffers on law enforcement, indigent medical care, etc.
I want to see drugs eliminated from America by any means necessary. That will invariably improve our society.
By the way, when it comes to executable offenses, you should read Leviticus. God made quite a few things executable offenses from the beginning, because they went against His natural order of things.
Last edited by RomaniGypsy; 11-07-2011 at 10:27 PM..
Reason: add
Then wouldn't the best way to improve the American gene pool be NOT to support addicts/alcoholics who reproduce as a means of supporting themselves instead of working (or who end up with their families on public assistance because their addictions prevent them from working)? We're going to have to take their kids away from them for abuse and neglect anyway in many cases and their kids will carry on the addict genes and the cycle continues on and on and on ...
Some people start drinking because they cannot find work to support their families. The best solution to end this problem is to be able to provide good employment to all. Btw when you speak of addiction you may want to be more specific, since many people actually believe that hemp addiction will keep people from working.
As for the cycle that you are talking about, I can only reply with an Huh? If someone has an addiction rather they are on assistance or not, they are going to feed that addiction. Children have no bearance on that addiction. The little bit of money that they get from PA does nothing to feed a real addiction. Addicts have other means of doing this such as prostitution, selling drugs, preparing drugs (meth/crack), or robbing other drug dealers. If the kids are neglected and reported they will eventually be turned in anyway, ironically many addicted parents will do anything possible for this not to happen because it will lower their benefits
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
