141–150 of 660 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You forgot: Large company complains that costs are rising for the services they are providing. “We need to give more money to large company because they cannot make a reasonable profit and the company is funding my reelection campaign.” Large company sells personal data gathered from citizens to other private companies, homeland security, and whoever else wants to pay the toll. “What a sweet deal! The citizens are pa…
I'm hoping this new court ruling that the Government can't go directly to companies and must go through the process if it involves civil rights (in the current case the Biden admin talking to social media sites about removing content is a violation of the first amendment) gos through and some lawyer get's it applied to all rights (in the case of your example to government going to companies to get around people's rig…
18 U.S.C. § 2384 - U.S. Code - Unannotated Title 18. Crimes and Criminal Procedure § 2384. Seditious conspiracy
"If two or more persons in any State or Territory, or in any place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, conspire to...or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States....
they shall each be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both."
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The best solution is not being exposed to some classes of drugs at all and fixing other issues that cause this. Yes we should have a “War on Drugs”? What could possibly go wrong?
Maybe look at Singapore and other places where it went right?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> How about empathy from your side? I have lost a friend due to addiction despite "care". The best solution is not being exposed to some classes of drugs at all. Maybe that's true, but the genie isn't going back into the bottle as like 50 years of the 'war on drugs' has so clearly demonstrated. The war on drugs started 18 June 1971 with Richard Nixon's declaration that drug abuse is “public enemy number one.” At this…
Think of the War on Drugs like a baked good. Just because we have failed attempting it doesn't mean we go around declaring we'll never try again! It just means we try harder. Joking aside, look at Singapore for a success case.
I'm not sure how Singapore fares, but Japan is also known for its hard-line drug policy. This just pushes the harm underground. Just because you don't see it, and society turns a blind eye to it, doesn't mean it's not there. tl;dr: the hardline policy towards drug use in Japan created a massive underground meth problem. [1]
[edit] It doesn't take much research to find out something quite similar is happening in Singapore, too.
> “People think drugs are very hard to get in Singapore, but actually before the pandemic they were everywhere, and even now there are people selling them.” [2]
Hardline policies don't reduce the harm. They just stop people from asking for help.
[0] https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2019/06/25/what-is-...
[1] https://www.vice.com/en/article/xg8q7k/how-stigma-created-ja...
[2] https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/courts-crime/young-an...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> ...how about basic human empathy? How about empathy from your side? I have lost a friend due to addiction despite "care". The best solution is not being exposed to some classes of drugs at all and fixing other issues that cause this.
[flagged]
n=1: during my visit to lisbon in 2021, i was accosted twice by burly guys near my hotel[1] who aggressively asked if i wanted to buy weed or cocaine. the first time, the guy was so angry at my refusal ("no thanks, man") that he followed me up a public staircase to continue his pitch. he backed off when i returned his verbal aggression. so maybe the portuguese policy could use some tweaking. [1] https://goo.gl/maps/y…
That doesn't seem very angry? Kinda exactly what I'd expect from a street salesperson. Your best bet is to ignore them entirely, the second you interact you're a fish on a hook, and it's their job to reel you in.
Angry is the Colombians who will suffocate you at knifepoint for not giving them cocaine.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Delegating to nonprofits is not the same as privatizing. Your argument creates a false dichotomy in which the only two possible actors are the state or private enterprises, but that’s not the case, even for the simple reasons that nonprofits are not the same as for-profit entities. Common Pool Resources are a prime example of a paradigm that escapes this dichotomy.
Hmm? A nonprofit is still a privately controlled entity. Many nonprofits and for-profits are given government grants and subsidies, this does not exclude them from being classified as private entities. So this still qualifies as privatization, no? If your contention is more rooted in the amount of direction that the government gives the private entity it is "delegating" to, then maybe that's something to explore? Tha…
In this sense, the fact that this was delegated to non-profit organizations, which have the same objectives as the state (provide help, rather than profit) makes some difference.
So the issue here seem more the funding cuts rather than who manages them.
n=1: during my visit to lisbon in 2021, i was accosted twice by burly guys near my hotel[1] who aggressively asked if i wanted to buy weed or cocaine. the first time, the guy was so angry at my refusal ("no thanks, man") that he followed me up a public staircase to continue his pitch. he backed off when i returned his verbal aggression. so maybe the portuguese policy could use some tweaking. [1] https://goo.gl/maps/y…
> So angry that .. he followed me ... to continue his pitch. That doesn't seem very angry? Kinda exactly what I'd expect from a street salesperson. Your best bet is to ignore them entirely, the second you interact you're a fish on a hook, and it's their job to reel you in. Angry is the Colombians who will suffocate you at knifepoint for not giving them cocaine.
For the last 15 years I've seen western media pushing pro drugs propaganda and whining about muh 'war on drugs' citing Portugal as an example model that could work. Guess that narrative was just that, a narrative.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Its fallacious only if I reject an argument you propose with that logic. Obviously, in the application of a logical argument, you need to respond to logic with logic. That being said, it's also obvious that a criminal isn't really a good authority on the justness of the crime they commit -- we implicitly understand that this is part of the rationalization process for antisocial behaviors. Also, yeah, the rape "analog…
>That being said, it's also obvious that a criminal isn't really a good authority on the justness of the crime they commit... How is that obvious? It's not at all obvious to me that, for example, MLK Jr was not an authority on the justice of civil disobedience because he himself practiced civil disobedience. If we disregard the opinions of people who think doing X is justified and therefore proceed to do X, then we b…
Not interested in making comparisons to someone that you can't separate from a type of neo-sainthood.
Anyhow, having an unpopular opinion isn't antisocial or illegal.
Buying heroin is.