|Funny Pictures||Funny Videos|
|Funny GIFs||YouTube Videos|
Rank #4897 on CommentsLevel 231 Comments: Ambassador Of Lulz
OfflineSend mail to olisaurus Block olisaurus Invite olisaurus to be your friend flag avatar
- Views: 10295guess you could say..
234 19 Total: +215
- Views: 10110...
160 14 Total: +146
- Views: 69732fast4u
83 16 Total: +67
- Views: 6610Title
35 5 Total: +30
- Views: 2412random WTFact #34335330305383555
31 11 Total: +20
- Views: 1411Old but gold
13 5 Total: +8
latest user's comments
|#22 - we need to go deeper [+] (1 new reply)||12 hours ago on This||+1|
|#141 - Picture||12 hours ago on Types of Metalheads at...||+5|
|#25 - then don't do drugs, you stupid ****** [+] (19 new replies)||03/08/2014 on Good guy cop||+34|
#116 - trollins (03/08/2014) [-]
Also, here is a kangaroo who didn't read the wet floor sign.
#137 - douthit (17 hours ago) [-]
How do they hurt the economy?
How do they hurt anyone but the user? And as for the user, that's a risk and trade-off for the individual to make, not you. I'm of age and prefer not to drink or smoke, but I don't have the right to hurt someone (or use the police to hurt someone) for doing it.
Drug arrests go without violence? The very act happens with threat of violence, which isn't that different. Men with guns, tasers, and bats say to submit to being put in chains and tossed in a cage with rapists and murderers. I'd call that violence. The actual immediate threat of violence violates the same principle as the violence itself. For example, a mugging is still a violent interaction even if they don't pull the trigger on the gun they put to a guy's gut.
#138 - trollins (17 hours ago) [-]
The money goes to the supplier, which is often off-shore.
They hurt others by the violent outbursts abuse causes. I and everyone else has the right to stop someone through force if they are hurting others.
Drug arrests need to have a violent aura around them or the assailant won't submit. There is violence in everyone who's involved's minds, but it rarely actually happens.
Your views are clouded.
#139 - douthit (16 hours ago) [-]
But saying that everyone who makes, sells, buys, or uses drugs should be punished because they could hurt someone is no different than saying alcohol users should be punished simply because they could drive drunk, or become abusive, or whatever else. Or that people shouldn't be allowed to have guns, because they could murder someone.
Purposely using violence or threat of violence against someone else is immoral, unless it's in self-defense. Otherwise, you're the aggressor. Negligence isn't as clear-cut as "don't murder, rape, or steal", but a single step in a direction that could lead to a negligent act certainly doesn't warrant force being used against someone. Now, if they're driving drunk and you call the cops that's one thing. But someone in their home, drinking a beer, or smoking pot, or something "harder", isn't doing any harm. If they get high and try to hurt someone, that's when it changes. But the drug use itself isn't immoral.
#140 - trollins (16 hours ago) [-]
The reason druggies are jailed for their potential to hurt someone is because there are a lot of drug-related crimes involving violence while with alcohol there are only accidents. Purchasing an item from people who hurt others is no different than hurting the others yourself.
#141 - douthit (15 hours ago) [-]
Usage rates and associated crime rates have only risen since Nixon declared it. Plus, from a rights perspective, I don't think anyone's got a right to tell you what you can put in your mouth than they do to tell you what can come out of it. Bro, do you even term paper?
#143 - douthit (15 hours ago) [-]
Even if you think that, it ignores all the arguments against continuing the war on drugs.
It means our courts, jails, prisons, and police time are occupied and pushed to the limits focusing on drugs.
It's cost over $1 trillion, and is adding millions--if not billions--more to national debts each year, debts that we're putting on our kids' and grandkids' tab. If nothing else, that money could lessen deficits, or fund schools, or go towards cancer research.
It maintains certain substances as taboo, just like alcohol during Prohibition, during which time alcohol use rates rose. It no doubt has an effect on increasing usage.
It turns otherwise nonviolent people violent in order to protect themselves from those who would rob them of their artificially-inflated narcotic valuables. Not to mention those who choose to turn to violence as defense from the police we employ to arrest them. Cops are killed all the time in drug-related matters, that if legal, wouldn't put them in dangerous situations fighting an uphill battle.
It's immoral. Negligence is a gray area, but we're not even discussing that, but rather simply the manufacture, sale, and usage of materials--which does harm to no one. But once we use violence, or pay for and advocate it, against people who aren't harming others, we become the face of violence.
#118 - wunderlichh (03/08/2014) [-]
#119 - trollins (03/08/2014) [-]
I think even the softer drugs should be kept illegal because while some abusers can control themselves, for many they're a gateway drug. Unfortunately for the responsible abusers, they have to be kept down because of the carelessness of others.
#120 - wunderlichh (03/08/2014) [-]
Welp, I thank you for your opinion and have a nice night!
|#593 - >vae l2 svenska din jävla nolla [+] (1 new reply)||03/04/2014 on niggernazi's profile||0|
|#591 - Vad fan har du just ******* säga om mig , lilla … [+] (3 new replies)||03/04/2014 on niggernazi's profile||0|
|#408 - those are some masculine veins||03/02/2014 on Knock knock, it's delivery||0|
|#12 - snälla nej||03/01/2014 on olisaurus's profile||0|
|#10 - nejdu [+] (2 new replies)||03/01/2014 on olisaurus's profile||0|
|#22 - Picture||03/01/2014 on Boobs||+11|
|#49 - says the guy on funnyjunk||03/01/2014 on murder alert||0|