America Has a Black-Market Problem, Not a Drug Problem • Hacker News Board

Re: America Has a Black-Market Problem, Not a Drug Problem

#111

Post by Terr_ » Tue, Mar 18, 2014, 2:44 AM UTC

gnaritas wrote: post #59

Terr_ wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you choose to make decisions that hurt you, you must suffer the consequences; it is not the state's place to protect you from yourself. 1. Not ever ? Surely you don't think that the age of majority/consent is 0-years-old? 2. Taxation for Military defense falls under that same umbrella! Normally, people would never pay any taxes to support it until they feel threatened... And then it's too late, and they suffer f…

> Surely you don't think that the age of majority/consent is 0-years-old? Need I preface everything I say with "between consenting adults?" > Taxation for Military defense falls under that same umbrella No it doesn't because taxation isn't a la carte; it's a fictional scenario.

> Need I preface everything I say with "between consenting adults?"

No, because it wouldn't help your argument anyway: The point (which I think you've tacitly acknowledged) is that sometimes the government SHOULD protect non-competent humans from making bad decisions... the only question is which shade of grey you think society should draw the line on.

> No it doesn't because taxation isn't a la carte; it's a fictional scenario.

Please read it again. I'm describing the system we DO have, and explaining how it is already preventing the society from making quote-unquote-"wrong" choices with their money.

Re: America Has a Black-Market Problem, Not a Drug Problem

#112

Post by gnaritas » Tue, Mar 18, 2014, 2:54 AM UTC

dragonwriter wrote: post #67

humanrebar wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Also, ironically, bigamy is not a violation of christian morality; While the Old Testament contains many examples of polygamy, all of them are neutral or bad examples. Jesus strongly implies that a man should have one wife and Paul explicitly says so, at least for leaders of the church. From a practical standpoint, widespread polygamy (which usually means polygyny) can lead to imbalances in marriage opportunity bet…

> From a practical standpoint, widespread polygamy (which usually means polygyny) can lead to imbalances in marriage opportunity So can widespread monogamy in certain circumstances. In fact, that's pretty much why polygamy usually manifests as polygyny -- in societies with norms favoring men fighting, or engaging in other high-risk activities and protecting women (and children, usually, but while that's important to…

Excellent points.

Re: America Has a Black-Market Problem, Not a Drug Problem

#113

Post by gnaritas » Tue, Mar 18, 2014, 2:55 AM UTC

jiggy2011 wrote: post #97

gnaritas wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If tax evasion is harmful to society, polygamy is harmful to ugly, poor men. It's less than desirable for ugly poor men, but doesn't mean victim. There is no victim involved in not being chosen as a mate by a women. If 5 women choose to marry the rich man, that's a choice between consenting adults and it harms no other party. No one is victimized by some other people getting married, whether it's because they're ga…

In an age of mass communication and easy global travel I could see it scaling up far beyond a rich guy marrying 5 women. It wouldn't be surprising to see certain superstars building harems counted by the hundred.

Nothing wrong with that as long as the women agree.

Re: America Has a Black-Market Problem, Not a Drug Problem

#114

Post by gnaritas » Tue, Mar 18, 2014, 3:05 AM UTC

Terr_ wrote: post #111

gnaritas wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Surely you don't think that the age of majority/consent is 0-years-old? Need I preface everything I say with "between consenting adults?" > Taxation for Military defense falls under that same umbrella No it doesn't because taxation isn't a la carte; it's a fictional scenario.

> Need I preface everything I say with "between consenting adults?" No, because it wouldn't help your argument anyway: The point (which I think you've tacitly acknowledged) is that sometimes the government SHOULD protect non-competent humans from making bad decisions... the only question is which shade of grey you think society should draw the line on. > No it doesn't because taxation isn't a la carte; it's a fiction…

Yes we should protect those who can't make those choices for themselves, but that's already the norm, there'd be a legal age no matter what we come up with. The interesting debate is what we allow adults to do, I consider the children a red herring.

Ok, I reread it, and I'd say providing for national defense was always a core job of government, it's in our constitution. The same is not true of these other things, we've not agreed by an amendment level of agreement that victimless crimes deserve jail. It's just wrong, there's no justification for jailing someone for anything related to what they ingest, who they marry and in what numbers, or anything else where the only direct victim is themselves. I own my body and no one has a right to claim otherwise.

Re: America Has a Black-Market Problem, Not a Drug Problem

#115

Post by thesimpsons1022 » Tue, Mar 18, 2014, 3:17 AM UTC

gnaritas wrote: post #28

drawkbox wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ok but defining victimless definitions would be a nightmare and ripe for abuse, violence is easy to define. Drugs are only violent if they are illegal, rape is violence, gambling is sometimes legal-- noone should ever be locked up for gambling -- it is not violent. Morals should not be used, civil rights and not affecting others rights should be the metric. You start involving morals, a bunch of religions have differ…

I could make the same argument about violence by talking about mental abuse. And as I said, morals are already involved, these crimes exist because of morals, not because they hurt people. The fact is, victimless is as easy to define as violence is or easy enough to have a pretty clear line. Consuming drugs hurts no one but the consumer. Having 5 wives hurts no one as long as they all consented. Gambling your own mon…

I agree with you but I feel like playing devils advocate.

>drugs hurt no one else

what about the family of the abuser? should a child grow up in the home of a heroin addict? doesn't society have the responsibility to protect children?

>gambling

humans are just dumb monkeys. we have psychological weaknesses to stuff like gambling. how many fathers will gamble away their grocery money?

>5 wives

is it really consent if a girl is too poor and uneducated to get a job and is forced into a polygamist marriage for subsistence?

Re: America Has a Black-Market Problem, Not a Drug Problem

#116

Post by thesimpsons1022 » Tue, Mar 18, 2014, 3:19 AM UTC

pstuart wrote: post #57

jcalvinowens wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Drugs, sex, gambling, bigamy, etc; basically laws based on Christian morality I'm curious what you say to the argument that manufacturing and profiting off extremely addictive and harmful drugs (ie meth or heroin) is a victumful crime? Many people get "hooked" on drugs like this, and it often ruins them both physiologically and financially. How can you justify ignoring such people as victims? Especially if they wer…

> extremely addictive and harmful drugs Like alcohol? Should we make it illegal again to protect its victims?

this is an argument against alcohol, not for other drugs. And personally I think society would be better off without it.

Re: America Has a Black-Market Problem, Not a Drug Problem

#117

Post by gnaritas » Tue, Mar 18, 2014, 3:22 AM UTC

ianferrel wrote: post #78

gnaritas wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Raising the chances of is not at all the same as happened. Excessive speeding can be a civil violation punishable by fines, not jail. Civil infraction != crime. > If there was a statistical link between a drug and increasing the chance of the user committing violence would you still consider drugs victimless Yes I would. Consuming drugs never creates a victim, that is an indisputable fact, you cannot victimize yourse…

Is there any action that is potentially dangerous enough that an instance of it in which no one happened to be harmed should be a criminal offense? Say I walk down the street firing a gun randomly, but I don't strike anyone with a bullet. Civil remedies only?

Yes. The fact that no one was hurt should make it not a criminal offense, maybe it's still severely punished civilly, but it should not incur being jailed.

Re: America Has a Black-Market Problem, Not a Drug Problem

#118

Post by gnaritas » Tue, Mar 18, 2014, 3:35 AM UTC

baddox wrote: post #76

gnaritas wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No I'm really not; taxes are perfectly constitutional. Call it theft if you like but you're just being ridiculous.

Theft existed before the constitution, and the constitution didn't change what it means.

Property is a social construct, society decides what is or isn't theft, not you. Taxation is not theft, and I'm not interested in the least in debating this, it's childish. You don't believe in government, I get it, and I don't care.

Re: America Has a Black-Market Problem, Not a Drug Problem

#119

Post by ne0codex » Tue, Mar 18, 2014, 3:35 AM UTC

samstave wrote: post #4

DerpDerpDerp wrote: post #2

And maybe we could do something about our policing problem at the same time... What, with using national (military) spying apparatus to go after drug dealers, police seizing assets from private citizens who they often don't accuse of a crime, the rampant militarization of domestic police forces... Well, it's nice to dream.

Every cop should be required to were a gopro on their chest. Anyone who has any encounter with a cop should have protected rights to access and review that video as material evidence in their case.

Ok and who will pay for that?

Re: America Has a Black-Market Problem, Not a Drug Problem

#120

Post by ne0codex » Tue, Mar 18, 2014, 3:38 AM UTC

DerpDerpDerp wrote: post #2

And maybe we could do something about our policing problem at the same time... What, with using national (military) spying apparatus to go after drug dealers, police seizing assets from private citizens who they often don't accuse of a crime, the rampant militarization of domestic police forces... Well, it's nice to dream.

I expect a comment like this on Reddit, not HN.