Re: King Donald
- Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2017 15:53:50 -0600
- From: Ron Hunter <rphunter@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: King Donald
On 2/6/2017 7:14 AM, Disaster Master wrote:
On Thu Feb 02 2017 03:46:55 GMT-0500 (Eastern Standard Time), Ron Hunter
On 2/1/2017 12:26 PM, Disaster Master wrote:
On Wed Feb 01 2017 11:58:54 GMT-0500 (Eastern Standard Time), Ron Hunter
On 2/1/2017 7:53 AM, Disaster Master wrote:
The only things I know about him that I don't like are his support of
institutionalized torture, and his anti-drug stance.
Although, he did used to be very pro full legalization of drugs (treat
them like alcohol), so maybe he'll come back around to that.
I doubt that. It is way to easy to lose control when half the people in
a country are stoned most of the time.
This is a typical pro drug war mentality/argument.
The fact is, if drugs were completely legalized, it probably wouldn't
change the ratio of stoned to non stoned much, if at all, and in many
cases, over time, the number of drug users would actually go down.
Nice theory. How did it work with alcohol?
Worked great... just look at what happened before, during and after
How is it working with pot?
Sorry, no way to tell, because it is still illegal at the federal level,
even in states that have legalized it.
The only way to really tell is to legalize it across the board.
Check the crime rates in places like Seattle, and Denver for the last
Sorry, I don't have access to real world stats like this. If you have a
source, by all means, provide them, but...
It wouldn't really prove anything, since drugs are still illegal at the
federal level (even in states where they have legalized).
Also, you're only talking about 'pot'. I'm talking about ALL drugs.
Last point - or rather, rhetorical question...
If it took a constitutional amendment to outlaw alcohol, why didn't it
take the same thing to outlaw other drugs?
Good question. Don't have an answer. Wasn't around that far back... Grin.
general mailing list