1. #110381
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    3,090

    Re: THEE SWAG THREAD

    [quote user="allentown PA"][quote user="jmike"]New Mexico costs in 2006 $2.5 billion, revenue including alcohol taxes $97 million.[/quote] question...since u dont seem to ever answer the question directly...Do u think the drunk driving laws are set with our well being in mind?[/quote]In mind? Yes. Are they effective? Mostly no. But I can say with confidense they weren't made with profits in mind and I'm the biggest cynic when it comes to our gov't I know.

  2. #110382
    All-Pro
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    6,818

    Re: THEE SWAG THREAD

    [quote user="jmike"][quote user="lawl"][quote user="jmike"][quote user="ny06"][quote user="lawl"][quote user="MattMeyerBud"][quote user="lawl"]


    [quote user="MattMeyerBud"]and no offense lawl, u said u never tried anything which is awesome

    but its also like a virgin trying to tell us what its like to have sex lol ya know
    [/quote]</P>


    Nah, not really. I'm not the one saying that once you take it and get addicted you should be able to stop*it or stop yourself from breaking the law once on it.</P>


    I'm saying if you get addicted and your life never gets back on track, then I don't give a ****. </P>


    [/quote]

    but thats my point

    u've never experienced it in your body, you don't know if u would pick up the habit or not if u ever tried it
    [/quote]</P>


    I wouldnt ever try it is the point.</P>


    *</P>


    *</P>


    If others think they can do it and want to then go for it. <FONT color=#0000ff>The only victim when you take a drug is yourself</FONT>, why should that be a crime? If you're willing to put yourself at risk then go ahead and do it, and if you happen to do something stupid enough such as stealing, murder etc, then thats why you should go to jail, not because you wanted to get high.</P>


    The increase in ****ed up people wont be that great, if there even is one. Why not help our economy instead of the ****ers in South America?</P>


    [/quote]</P>


    I disagree with that. A heavy user of drugs hurts the people who love them. Look at how many marriages and families have been destroyed over the use of drugs. </P>


    [/quote]

    Maybe I am jumping in to a conversation and don't know the whole scope........but.....I agree with ny06 here.* I've battled my own addiction issues and what got me to stop was not what I was doing to myself, but what I was doing to my sister.* I wasn't even a victim as survival was not the plan for me.* But I was not the only one with problems.* In my selfishness I forgot that I wasn't the only one to lose their parents, my sister did too and I was about to cause her to lose another person she loved, and that wasn't fair.* So to say it is victimless just isn't true.


    [/quote] Right, but the drug wasn't hurting your sister, it was you taking stuff that was hurting her. That was a personal choice of yours just like it was a choice to stop. I find it rather unreasonable to say that the gov should be responsible for banning things that indirectly hurt others, emotionally at that.[/quote]</P>


    *</P>


    That is a terrible arguement and makes no sense.* "It's not the nuclear bomb that was hurting anyone, it was the person choosing to set it off.* I find it rather unreasonable to say that the government should be responsible for banning things that indirectly hurt others."</P>


    Ridiculous, yes, but no more so than your point.* By your logic, the government should only ban people and nothing else.* So once we get rid of all those damned people, we'll be fine.</P>


    However, I agree that the government should not waste it's time and resources chasing those who choose to destroy their lives.* Much better things to do (like have baseball players talk about steriods in a pointless hearing, when everyone with 2 functioning brain cells knew they were taking them).* My drug of choice was legal, so if someone wants to get wasted they will find a way and by criminalizing it you create more crime.</P>


    I was only responding to the scope of victim point.* You can't make an arguement that there is only one victim when there isn't.</P>[/quote]


    Your analogy to disprove me is rather far off. Nuclear bombs actually do hurt people(surprise). Your sister was hurt because of what *you* were doing, not what the drug was doing. The drug never directly harmed her, whereas nuclear bombs dish out quite alot.

    It comes down to personal choice and responsibility. If its something you want to do and it doesn't directly harm someone else...then what's the problem??


  3. #110383

    Re: THEE SWAG THREAD

    [quote user="jmike"][quote user="allentown PA"][quote user="jmike"]New Mexico costs in 2006 $2.5 billion, revenue including alcohol taxes $97 million.[/quote] question...since u dont seem to ever answer the question directly...Do u think the drunk driving laws are set with our well being in mind?[/quote]In mind? Yes.* Are they effective?* Mostly no.* But I can say with confidense they weren't made with profits in mind and I'm the biggest cynic when it comes to our gov't I know.[/quote]

    come on now...u cant be serious...why not adopt england's law...they do a fine job...if we were really concerned with the safety of our citizens why not that?

  4. #110384
    All-Pro
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Right Here
    Posts
    6,834

    Re: THEE SWAG THREAD

    Hey Allentown..I don't doubt that the moneys taken in on fines and what not go'es into a pot..which is usedto offset court costs but there is no way they are making money...its just not happening..

  5. #110385

    Re: THEE SWAG THREAD

    [quote user="byron"]Hey Allentown..I don't doubt that the moneys taken in on fines and what not go'es into a pot..which is used*to offset court costs but there is no way they are making money...its just not happening..[/quote]

    i will give u that...but u have to agree that this law is not set up with our safety in mind.

  6. #110386
    All-Pro
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Right Here
    Posts
    6,834

    Re: THEE SWAG THREAD



    [quote user="allentown PA"][quote user="byron"]Hey Allentown..Ir himself...don't doubt that the moneys taken in on fines and what not go'es into a pot..which is usedto offset court costs but there is no way they are making money...its just not happening..[/quote] i will give u that...but u have to agree that this law is not set up with our safety in mind.[/quote]</P>


    Come on man while it may not be as stiff as Englands laws its intent is the same and meant to protect people...keep the drunk driver off the streets so he don't kill somebody or himself...How good it works is another matter...</P>

  7. #110387
    All-Pro
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    6,818

    Re: THEE SWAG THREAD

    [quote user="byron"]

    [quote user="allentown PA"][quote user="byron"]Hey Allentown..Ir himself...*don't doubt that the moneys taken in on fines and what not go'es into a pot..which is used*to offset court costs but there is no way they are making money...its just not happening..[/quote] i will give u that...but u have to agree that this law is not set up with our safety in mind.[/quote]</P>


    Come on man while it may not be as stiff as Englands laws its intent is the same and meant to protect people...keep the drunk driver off the streets so he don't kill somebody or himself...How good it works is another matter...</P>[/quote]

    Agreed byron, i can't imagine there being any other "true" reason behind duis other than the discouraging of drunk driving

  8. #110388
    All-Pro
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Right Here
    Posts
    6,834

    Re: THEE SWAG THREAD

    How did it goMh!

  9. #110389
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    3,090

    Re: THEE SWAG THREAD

    [quote user="allentown PA"][quote user="jmike"][quote user="allentown PA"][quote user="jmike"]New Mexico costs in 2006 $2.5 billion, revenue including alcohol taxes $97 million.[/quote] question...since u dont seem to ever answer the question directly...Do u think the drunk driving laws are set with our well being in mind?[/quote]In mind? Yes. Are they effective? Mostly no. But I can say with confidense they weren't made with profits in mind and I'm the biggest cynic when it comes to our gov't I know.[/quote] come on now...u cant be serious...why not adopt england's law...they do a fine job...if we were really concerned with the safety of our citizens why not that?[/quote]I never argued that their laws on the subject aren't better, they are. I just said that our gov't isn't turning a profit on it.

  10. #110390

    Re: THEE SWAG THREAD

    [quote user="jmike"][quote user="allentown PA"][quote user="jmike"][quote user="allentown PA"][quote user="jmike"]New Mexico costs in 2006 $2.5 billion, revenue including alcohol taxes $97 million.[/quote] question...since u dont seem to ever answer the question directly...Do u think the drunk driving laws are set with our well being in mind?[/quote]In mind? Yes.* Are they effective?* Mostly no.* But I can say with confidense they weren't made with profits in mind and I'm the biggest cynic when it comes to our gov't I know.[/quote] come on now...u cant be serious...why not adopt england's law...they do a fine job...if we were really concerned with the safety of our citizens why not that?[/quote]I never argued that their laws on the subject aren't better, they are.* I just said that our gov't isn't turning a profit on it.[/quote]

    but ur missing my point and that is that our drunk driving laws are not completly designed with out safety at mind..money has a lot to do with it. If it was all about safety then we would have stiffer penalties.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts