-Caveat Lector-
J FROST wrote:
I started the dope debate to collect all
arguments.
I had no idea that I would get so many.
I have created a folder to put all the post so
I
could sort out the arguments pro and con.
The above is the only part of your e-mail that
sounds half way
-Caveat Lector-
#1 You support the "freedoms" of drunks, dope users and all the above
to endanger and sacrifice a % of innocent victims or
#2 You do not support the freedoms of people to endanger and sacrifice
any victims?
#3 or .. you are a two face hypocrite who denies others
-Caveat Lector-
In a message dated 2/7/99 11:21:38 AM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:
#1 You support the "freedoms" of drunks, dope users and all the above
to endanger and sacrifice a % of innocent victims or
#2 You do not support the freedoms of people to endanger and
-Caveat Lector-
I started the dope debate to collect all arguments.
I had no idea that I would get so many.
I have created a folder to put all the post so I
could sort out the arguments pro and con.
When people take a stand from scratch or
when they are emotionally involved, they can not
see
-Caveat Lector-
Concerning your diatribes:
If you wish to be on the list, please do it without the invective rhetoric.
This is not a list about political theories of right vs left. And as to which
delusions are correct.
Continue this offtopic nonesense and ill-behaviour and your ability to
-Caveat Lector-
"Brown, Jeremy" wrote:
-Caveat Lector-
MJ,
I admit I'm quite puzzled by your post. You say that I'm afraid of
freedom, however you have produced nothing to support that claim. What I am
afraid of is that more people, like my friend, will die because we all sit
by
-Caveat Lector-
In a message dated 2/4/99 12:05:38 PM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
You
wouldn't let a crazy person walk through a shopping mall with a loaded
pistol, correct?
This is not a valid argument IMO. Besides I would submit that there are
plenty of people
-Caveat Lector-
In a message dated 2/4/99 3:27:40 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:
Why
blame the little addict when it's the gov. pushing in the first place??My
humble
opinion as it is.hmmm...
Excellent point lost in the shuffle by some probably!
Teo1000
-Caveat Lector-
Teo One Thousand wrote:
-Caveat Lector-
In a message dated 2/4/99 3:27:40 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:
Why
blame the little addict when it's the gov. pushing in the first place??My
humble
opinion as it is.hmmm...
Excellent point
-Caveat Lector-
I would submit that there are plenty of people who are crazy who
walk around all the time with a loaded weapon and DON'T shoot anyone.
Should they all be punished simply because they MIGHT do something wrong?
///
People can't help it that they are crazy but sane people are held
-Caveat Lector-
There is no such thing as "stupid/illegal." "Stupid" and "illegal" are
different words. They have different meanings. To conjoin them is
disingenuous
///
The words have different meanings ... like water you are different
things, but when you get in the water you are all wet.
-Caveat Lector-
Frosty wrote:
#1 Do you believe in equal rights ... yes or no
MJ:
Yes. but based upon the Natural Rights Ideal of an individual's RIGHT to their
own life as the subjagation of might.
Frosty wrote:
#2 Should every one have the same right to profit, get stupid or do
-Caveat Lector-
One writes:
The Drug War is marketed as the only way to "save our children." Yet,
eighty
years into the most protracted and expensive experiment in Prohibition in
history, illicit drugs are more available on the streets, on our
playgrounds,
and in our school yards than ever.
-Caveat Lector-
It is hard to follow your schizophrenic posts, with talk back and forth on the
issue, but I will respond thus. Driving while intoxicated is a choice you
make, there are consequences for that choice, that you MAY hurt someone. I
may go out and kill someone today just cause I
: Re: [CTRL] DOPE SUPPORTERS
-Caveat Lector-
It is hard to follow your schizophrenic posts, with talk back and forth on
the
issue, but I will respond thus. Driving while intoxicated is a choice you
make, there are consequences for that choice, that you MAY hurt someone.
I
may go out
would have seen that
for yourself.
In the future, perhaps it is you who should apply a little common sense.
JB
-Original Message-
From: Ed Moore [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, February 04, 1999 1:26 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [CTRL] **DOPE SUPPORTERS
From: M. A. Johnson [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, February 04, 1999 3:20 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [CTRL] **DOPE SUPPORTERS**
-Caveat Lector-
Brown, Jeremy wrote:
The issue I was raising was that once you get behind the wheel of a
car,
you have now brou
-Caveat Lector-
Jeremy Brown:
You say that I'm afraid of freedom, however you have produced nothing
to support that claim.
MJ:
Criminalizing driving while drunk infringes upon one's freedom to do
such. While it may not be SMART to participate in such an action, if
*I* were to become
-Caveat Lector-
How exactly is passing a Law which says one cannot 'smoke a rock
of crack' going to ensure 'people' are NOT going to then 'drive a
school bus'?
We have discriminatory drunk driving laws currently, but 'people' STILL
choose this behavior.
///
No law stops crime, if so there
-Caveat Lector-
Brown, Jeremy wrote:
It appears that, in an attempt to get to the bottom of this,
we have painted ourselves into a corner.
MJ:
?
Brown, Jeremy wrote:
This is the old "fire in a crowded theater" argument.
MJ:
False analogy. One who yells fire in a crowded theater
20 matches
Mail list logo
