Judge sentences man to 25 years for beating trick-or-treater

AP ^ | June 12, 2002

[southern rock]

"This defendant is a poster child against the argument for drugs being legalized,"

What about baseball bats?

[The Green Goblin]

I myself probably couldn't score a quarter bag of pot in 30 mins.

You've apparently never been to Austin...

[Texaggie79]

Yes I have, I'm just not within 30 mins of it.

[The Green Goblin]

Talk a walk through the center of town, and it won't be long before someone will try to sell you drugs, whether you look like you take them or not...

[Texaggie79]

I don't much recognize you out of costume.....

[headsonpikes]

"...no defense from prosecution."

Exactly. The entire concept of 'diminished capacity' should be thrown out.

Why should drunks and cokeheads walk because they were 'under the influence'.

Just another paternalistic insult to responsible individuals.

[Melinator]

You go check price, availability, purity and popularity since the early 60s, then get back to me. Don't forget to adjust price for inflation.

[Texaggie79]

So, if they were suddenly legalized, they would be the same price, and just as easy to get.........? lol

[Belial]

There are no responsible peaceful meth users. The drug makes that impossible.

That's not true. Crystal is a lousy drug, but plenty of students use it, usually without practicing baseball or golf swings on their friends.

Predisposition to violence matters. There are people who simply don't freak out under the influence, and others who do. For whatever that's worth.

[Melinator]

Since the start of the Drug War, prices are down, numbers and ages of users are up, availability is up, supply is up, purity is up and there are approximately 14 million people in the U.S. who are willingly admit to using them regularly.

What were the numbers before the Drug War?

[FastCoyote]

Something the pro-legalization cadre will ignore. After all, it was "only" a trick-or-treater whose right to play in the neighborhood gets trumped by the adult's right to recreational poisons.

No reason to ignore it, it is likely this guy had many prior incidents and was allowed to slither through the system. Now he will be sentenced and hopefully hung. But there is already a $100 billion drug trade, that means millions of users, and you have cops spending their time going after non-violent offenders when the money would be better spent "profiling" the real nut jobs.

The burden of proof you have to fill is to show even if we spend the entire GDP on the drug war, we won't still have wacked out psychos (some not even on drugs) preying on the innocent.

[Belial]

It is was my kid, this guy would never make it to prison.

What's up with this macho vigilante schtick? So your son gets to see you on Sundays through a plastic wall, the one respite you'll have from slave labor and prison conjugal duties.

[The Green Goblin]

I don't much recognize you out of costume.....

Due to the overwhelming success of the Spider Man movie, I've decided to tone down my public exposure to some degree. Familiarity breeds contempt, and all that...:)

[FastCoyote]

"Individual drug use does not take place in a vacuum. A junkie never just affects himself. Sorry, in a perfect world that may be the case. But the reality is drug use affects entire communities whether they use or not."

That's why I think ice cream, fats, sugar, skateboards, bikes, pools, cigarettes, alcohol, GUNS, should all be banned because their use affects the entire community.

[galt-jw]

amen to that one, bro. this shlub will do everything except admit that he/she is a pure statist. even after confronted with the question: if it is not YOUR life based on what you can do with it, barring anarchy, WHOSE life is it? i still have to get an answer on that one. since i never have, not even once, i no longer correspond with them. they are like babies who plug their ears and say "nanana cant hear you", when faced with their own identity.

the children will not admit that their beliefs imply the life of the individual belongs to the state.

[Texaggie79]

how modest......

[FastCoyote]

If drugs should be banned, GUNs should be banned

Both are items desired by millions, for recreation and practical use, and both can be misused with deadly consequence. Moreover, guns are very likely to kill innocent bystanders, just like it is proposed meth did in this article. So, tell me what the difference is, and then tell me why alcohol and cigarettes shouldn't be banned.

[Mark17]

PS — Michigan is full of hicks; the South definitely doesn't have a monopoly.

Yes, unfortunately, most of them are Red Wing fans. I hate those Red Wings.

[Kevin Curry]

Colbrunn was allegedly high on methamphetamine when he unleashed his fury on the boy.

You do realize, don't you, that this would have NEVER happened had methamphetamines been legal.

It isn't the drug that's bad--its the state's foolishness in making such substances illegal that causes the harm.

At least that's what the liberdopians tell me. No, it doesn't make sense, but "making sense" isn't a liberdopian strength.

[FastCoyote]

Time To Ban Money And Sex!!!

"The issue isn't whether it is impossible to get an illegal substance - we know know it IS possible. The issue is whether we should even THINK of legalizing something that would 'cause' someone to do this.

Many many many more people die from greed for money than from drugs (bank robbers, 7-11 stickups, etc.). And most violent deaths of females are due to rape and sexual assault, rather than drugs.

Therefore I know you will all agree that money and sex should be banned. If the government just doled out the goods, there would be no need for money and petty thieves/muggers would disappear. And if we cut off the balls of 9 out of 10 men (and just kept the last 10% penned as breeding studs), we could eliminate violent sexual predation. After all:

The issue is whether we should even THINK of legalizing something that would 'cause' someone to do this.