Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Right? Not Stossel
Vancouver 24 Hours ^ | June 2, 2006 | Irwin Loy

Posted on 06/04/2006 4:20:59 PM PDT by Lorianne

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120121-135 last
To: Lorianne

You know, even if I don't agree with him on all topics, I do on some and I respect him for not trying to be what he's not. If he is honest about his opinions and beliefs and they line up more with a libertarian philosophy than a conservative one, well that's fine. Frankly, I would be worried if somebody else mirrored my personal beliefs exactly on every issue (my wife doesn't even do that, although she's real close).


121 posted on 06/06/2006 3:44:12 PM PDT by Pablo64 ("Everything I say is fully substantiated by my own opinion.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ghost of Philip Marlowe

If he said that, I would disagree with him. Nevertheless, for other reasons, I firmly agree that the WOD needs to be brought to a halt.


122 posted on 06/06/2006 3:44:27 PM PDT by RobRoy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: flintsilver7

>>Decriminalizing the possession of drugs will do nothing to alleviate the problems associated with the abuse of drugs<<

True, but it will sure eliminate the problems associated with the WOD, just as ending prohibition eliminated the problems associated with prohibition.

FWIW, the worst drug I ever took was Marijuana, and the last time I tried it was in 1978. I am staunchly against the WOD and think it has literally harmed our culture as much as the Great Society has. Probably more.


123 posted on 06/06/2006 3:49:11 PM PDT by RobRoy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: calex59

You can't fool me. I saw Reefer Madness! I know just how bad those drugs are and what happens to everyone that takes them!

Oh, and </sarcasm>


124 posted on 06/06/2006 3:51:43 PM PDT by RobRoy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: FreedomPoster
Do you even know the definition?

If there's a straw-man argument, the straw man is in saying that getting rid of the illegality will get rid of the problems (cost of enforcement, LEO not being able to focus on other crimes, people being jailed for 'petty' offenses, etc.) associated with the illegality -- as if they are the only problems associated with recreational drug usage. That is the straw man.

Nice to see that 'straw man,' 'non sequitur,' 'cite your sources,' and 'ad hominem,' are still the only points of formal logic that Freepers seem to be familiar with, usually misapply them, and usually when a formal argument is not underway but a mere discussion of an issue. Drugs. Indiscreetly breast-feeding in public. Evolution/Intelligent design. Three topics Freepers are unable to discuss rationally and with respect for one another. I wonder what is common to all three that breaks down civility.
125 posted on 06/06/2006 4:54:40 PM PDT by Ghost of Philip Marlowe (Liberals are blind. They are the dupes of Leftists who know exactly what they're doing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies]

To: Ghost of Philip Marlowe

Do you?

Link to where Stossel has said that getting rid of the illegality will get rid of the problems? Don't have one? Oh, so that's just a straw man you created?

Most opposed to the WOD mentality recognize there are still problems, but believe them less than those created by that mentality.

But you proceed with your straw men.


126 posted on 06/06/2006 5:00:24 PM PDT by FreedomPoster (Guns themselves are fairly robust; their chief enemies are rust and politicians) (NRA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 125 | View Replies]

To: FreedomPoster
Thanks for proving to me and anyone who reads the thread that you have no idea what a straw-man argument is. Even after I explained it to you.

Good job!

And by the way, read his book. In it he clearly lays out many of the problems associated with the WOD and on drug usage. He does not claim that ending the WOD will get rid of ALL the problems (as Physicist rightly pointed out). However, by stating the problems beyond the problems associated with the WOD, the implication is that if we legalize drugs, the other problems will go away, too. He has cited sources that believe legalizing and taxing the product will generate enough revenue to cover problems related to drug usage.

But hey. That's all irrelevant, isn't it.
127 posted on 06/06/2006 5:10:15 PM PDT by Ghost of Philip Marlowe (Liberals are blind. They are the dupes of Leftists who know exactly what they're doing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 126 | View Replies]

To: Ghost of Philip Marlowe
He does not claim that ending the WOD will get rid of ALL the problems (as Physicist rightly pointed out).

Isn't that the point? YOU claimed he did. Right here.

128 posted on 06/06/2006 5:25:05 PM PDT by FreedomPoster (Guns themselves are fairly robust; their chief enemies are rust and politicians) (NRA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 127 | View Replies]

To: calex59
How anyone can understand that repealing prohibition eleminated, at least 99 percent, the crime associated with Alcohol ...

An important distinction here: There is crime related to alcohol (or drugs) directly, and there is crime related to the sales and distribution of same. Eliminating prohibition did nothing to stop crimes committed under the influence of alcohol. The Kennedy Clan springs to mind.

If society were much more harsh on these crimes, I'd be more sanguine about lifting prohibitions on other drugs. Imagine what Teddy and Son could do on a PCP bender or tweeking on meth.

129 posted on 06/06/2006 5:34:31 PM PDT by LexBaird (Tyrannosaurus Lex, unapologetic carnivore)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: robertpaulsen
You say drug prohibition "isn't working". What do you mean, "isn't working"?

Anyone who wants any substance can get it anytime they want. And more people use them than did before your famously "successful" war on the citizens who use drugs.

Not to mention, it has made the situation worse in myriad ways, including but not limited to, destroying liberty, trampling rights, corrupting the police and politicians, fostering an unhealthy disregard and disrespect for the law and the authorities, and enriching the lowest and most violent people in society.

I'm sure that "works for you", but it sure doesn't work in any real way.

It sucks worse than drug use, and the people who support it are hypocrites and they suck even worse.

Most of them are former or current users and dealers who won't admit their crimes while they advocate the imprisonment of those who have done precisely the same as them but had the misfortune to be caught.

UN-Apprehended drug criminals have no credibility when advocating for the WOD.

130 posted on 06/07/2006 7:19:35 AM PDT by Protagoras ("A real decision is measured by the fact that you have taken a new action"... Tony Robbins)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 115 | View Replies]

To: Protagoras
"Anyone who wants any substance can get it anytime they want."

So ending the War on Drugs would see no increase in the number of users or the amount of drugs they use. That's what you want me to believe, right?

Well, that's ludicrous. You have no credibility, none, if that's what you sincerely believe.

131 posted on 06/07/2006 8:39:56 AM PDT by robertpaulsen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 130 | View Replies]

To: robertpaulsen
Funny how you ignored all the facts I presented before you tried to put your imbecilic strawman agrument in my mouth.

Un-apprehended drug criminals have no credibility when advocating for authoritarian usurpations of citizen's rights.

132 posted on 06/07/2006 8:46:21 AM PDT by Protagoras ("A real decision is measured by the fact that you have taken a new action"... Tony Robbins)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 131 | View Replies]

To: Protagoras
"Funny how you ignored all the facts I presented before you tried to put your imbecilic strawman agrument in my mouth."

Now you're backpedalling?

YOU stated that, today, "anyone who wants any substance can get it anytime they want". Therefore, legalizing drugs will make no difference whatsoever in people being able to get drugs. Drug use will stay the same.

That's what you're saying. Or are you now admitting that drug use will go up if we legalize it? Well then, that means the WOD is working to keep drug use down, now isn't it?

Look, when you figure out your position on this, get back to me.

133 posted on 06/07/2006 10:07:20 AM PDT by robertpaulsen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 132 | View Replies]

To: robertpaulsen
YOU stated that, today, "anyone who wants any substance can get it anytime they want".

Correct.

Therefore, legalizing drugs will make no difference whatsoever in people being able to get drugs. Drug use will stay the same.

OOPs, not even close. You might be accused of being dimwitted and jumping to a moronic conclusion, but since you knew it was wrong,,,You lied.

That's what you're saying.

No, you said that and tried to pretend I did. You lied.

Or are you now admitting that drug use will go up if we legalize it?

No. I never took a position on that, and it is irrelevant. YOUR goofy war didn't work. That was the point. I don't have to say that the opposite will work to prove your goofy war sucks and is a huge failure and causes harm as well.

Well then, that means the WOD is working to keep drug use down, now isn't it?

Of course not. You are purposely obtuse. (Hopefully, it would be sad to think you were naturally obtuse)

Look, when you figure out your position on this, get back to me.

I know my position and have stated it clearly. Your inability to understand or stop lying about it is a personal problem for you, not me.

134 posted on 06/07/2006 10:16:31 AM PDT by Protagoras ("A real decision is measured by the fact that you have taken a new action"... Tony Robbins)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 133 | View Replies]

To: Beagle8U
Most of the issues they [libertarians] do agree on are the same ones that Republicans do.

Except for drugs, porn, prostitution ... Anyway, what's your point in making that observation?

135 posted on 06/10/2006 9:26:08 AM PDT by Know your rights (The modern enlightened liberal doesn't care what you believe as long as you don't really believe it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 118 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120121-135 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson