I'll take that as a yes!bobevenson wrote:The illegalization of marijuana benefits the rich at the expense of the poor? If marijuana were legal like regular cigarets, it would Improve quality and reduce price to the consumer. I think you need to come up with another example.
You would rather have poor people pay as much as possible for poor quality marijuana, right? You don't want rich people contributing to higher quality and lower prices for poor people, right? I rest my case, you poor pathetic fool.SpheresOfBalance wrote:I'll take that as a yes!bobevenson wrote:The illegalization of marijuana benefits the rich at the expense of the poor? If marijuana were legal like regular cigarets, it would Improve quality and reduce price to the consumer. I think you need to come up with another example.
please follow this link to continue:
viewtopic.php?f=13&t=12904
No HQ, you got me all wrong, as I would find no pleasure in the news of your misguided resolve. No matter who it was that was either killed, or did the killing, I'd feel sorry for them. Knowing that they just didn't deserve/get it. Killing another human should be reserved for self defense and nothing more, and even then one should try and resolve the conflict peacefully.henry quirk wrote:"...should shoot themselves instead..."
Won't give you the pleasure.
Yes, HQ I hear you, from an emotional standpoint, but intellectually, I understand that the mass killer, didn't have complete free will, that he was obviously mentally stunted.henry quirk wrote:"Killing another human should be reserved for self defense"
Perhaps killing the mass killer 'is' (a kind of retroactive/proactive) self-defense.
Certainly the dead mass killer can't kill again.
As to the four legged, I understand, but as to the two legged, I do in fact feel sorry for you, as everyone can be seen as anothers rabid dog, in one way or another.henry quirk wrote:"I understand that the mass killer, didn't have complete free will, that he was obviously mentally stunted."
Irrelevant for me.
If a (four- or two-legged) rabid dog is comin' for me, I'm not wastin' time wonderin' how much self-control it (or, he, or she) has.
In the same way: I have the rabid dog in a cage...I can keep it locked up and (carefully) care take it for the rest of its life, or, I can put it out of its misery (and scratch one problem offa the list).
Not seein' what obligates me to 'care take' a rabid dog.
But maybe you wouldn't have to plan so hard, if you saw it differently. Do you think this way shall serve you well when you're old and senile, an ever easier target? Or at that time shall you depend upon sympathy?henry quirk wrote:"There is absolutely no justification for killing anybody except for self-defense when there is no other alternative."
I agree.
Where we disagree: a definition of "self-defense" (I'm thinkin' mine is a bit broader than yours), and, criteria for assessing when "there is no other alternative".
*shrug*
##
"I do in fact feel sorry for you..."
Likewise.
#
"...as everyone can be seen as anothers rabid dog, in one way or another"
No shit...'prey versus predator'/'me versus you' is fundamental to living.
That is: I fully expect to be viewed by some (by many) as 'mad dog' or 'food'.
I plan accordingly.
And the government will decide whether to throw your ass behind bars.henry quirk wrote: Not trusting the other guy to be as interested in my living as 'me', *I'll decide what the appropriate criteria is for my self-defense.