Re: A Prison State, If Not a Police State

From: Bill (xxx_at_yy.zz)
Date: 03/01/05 

Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2005 16:14:19 GMT

"Manny Davis" <nothanks@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:Xns960C681B29F15nothanksnowherecom@68.1.17.6...
> "Bill" <xxx@yy.zz> wrote in
> news:ta%Ud.15291$hU7.1722@newssvr33.news.prodigy.com:
>
>>
>> "Rump Ranger" <buttpirate@fadmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:1109629541.423655.307910@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>>>
>>> Bill wrote:
>>>> "Manny Davis" <nothanks@nowhere.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:Xns960BAC7E7570nothanksnowherecom@68.1.17.6...
>>>> > "Bill" <xxx@yy.zz> wrote in
>>>> > news:y5yUd.4346$DW.4279@newssvr17.news.prodigy.com:
>>>> >
>>>> >>
>>>> >> "Socialism is a Mental Disease" <root@localhost.> wrote in
>>>> >> message news:gt9521hkjj6vpb6c85vjt0s7v8l97nd9ge@4ax.com...
>>>> >>> On Sun, 27 Feb 2005 23:38:26 GMT, "Bill" <xxx@yy.zz> wrote:
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>>"Socialism is a Mental Disease" <root@localhost.> wrote in
>>> message
>>>> >>>>news:og642150e7fdjgg5qc7j4na53ngeb5ihgk@4ax.com...
>>>> >>>>> On Sun, 27 Feb 2005 09:14:22 GMT, "Bill" <xxx@yy.zz> wrote:
>>>> >>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>>"Socialism is a Mental Disease" <root@localhost.> wrote in
>>> message
>>>> >>>>>>news:g9s22114p013o5fjfrm925nv91eps39v45@4ax.com...
>>>> >>>>>>> On Sun, 27 Feb 2005 06:37:15 GMT, "Bill" <xxx@yy.zz> wrote:
>>>> >>>>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>>>>I disagree. You would also need to do things like control
>>> ammonia
>>>> >>>>>>>>and place
>>>> >>>>>>>>such cold medications behind pharmacy counters. It is clear
>>> that
>>>> >>>>>>>>if you ristrict the supply of hard drugs there will be less
>>>> >>>>>>>>addicts. On the local
>>>> >>>>>>>>level, I would put more emphasis on support rather than law
>>>> >>>>>>>>enforcement.
>>>> >>>>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>>> Hey, how about controlling how many burgers I eat every
>>>> >>>>>>> week?
>>>> >>>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>>For you, please eat more. :)
>>>> >>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>
>>>> >>>>> Do you have some sick pleasure in controlling what people do
>>> with
>>>> >>>>> themselves? Is that a tyrant gene I see in your DNA?
>>>> >>>>>
>>>> >>>>>
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>>It is pretty much the opposite. But you seem to have the same
>>> stock
>>>> >>>>answers to
>>>> >>>>fit all situations whether they apply or not. Have another
>>> hamburger.
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> You want to control what people do with your own bodies.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Certainly. But I have but 1.
>>>> >>
>>>> >>>You may not
>>>> >>> see yourself as a tyrant but a tyrant you are.
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Actually, I am emphasizing control at the boarder not at the
>>>> >> local level and more help to people at the local level. In part
>>>> >> because drugs are infectious - they spread one to the other.
>>>> >
>>>> > What nonsense. Ingesting a drug is a volitional decision. If I
>>> choose to
>>>> > use a drug I am not being "infected" by someone else.
>>>> >
>>>> > Do you consider alcohol and tobacco to be "infectious" also? Or
>>>> > are
>>> only
>>>> > the drugs you don't like infectious?
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>> Probably. What I mean is that users tend to make other people users.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Wrong.
>>
>> No. It is absoluetly true. I "learned" to smoke from peers around me,
>> for example. So as I said users tend to make other people users.
>> Obviously they have a choice. This is not an issue I raised,
>
> It isn't true as written. How about if reword your claim to something
> like "Users sometimes influence other people into using."
>
> But the opposite of that claim is also true. People who use drugs like meth
> and crack often have the opposite effect on non users. One can see a meth
> addict and quickly realize that you want nothing to do with that drug.
>
> Furthermore, why limit this idea to just drugs? You, for instance, have the
> idea in your head that government agents should shoot people who cross the
> border of a country.

I never suggested any such thing. In fact I have said the opposite. People
should not be shot but an attempt made to capture - as happens today.

> In my mind this is horribly wrong. Yet you are
> "infecting" others by talking about it here on usenet, and perhaps others
> will begin to think like you do. The "infection" you are spreading
> is far more pernicious than that of a peaceful drug user.
>
>

I'm not even sure where this discussion started but I think it was my
suggestion that people are sometimes introduced to drugs by others in social
situations and if they were very scarce this would be less likely to happen.
This still seems true.

Bill

Quantcast