Political Idealogy

Communism is for sure the perfect gov’t, and if it was not for the human desires of power and wealth, we would see communism as a desiding factor in the ways of the world. If someone could put their wants behind them communism would still exist in many world superpowers.

clearly rushhour, you are an idiot. if it were the PERFECT govt, then there would be no ifs ands or buts. you cant say “it is the perfect govt. if it werent for x then it would work”
thats one of the stupidest things ive heard lately

I got 3,000 per guy per year. This at a rate of 1 hundred new criminals each year comes out to about 20,000 criminals at any one time. That comes to $60,000,000 per year.

Now you’re just pulling figures out of your ass. Assuming 100 executions a year, and 3000 dollars a year to house an inmate the net result is only a 200-300K a year difference. Disperse this over 50 states and the average gain for each state is only 6K a year. So the question becomes is 300K a year to high a price for justice. Consider that if the state executed the wrong man and a court awarded damages into the millions this would evaporate the economic benefits of a decade. This of course begs the question can the gov’t be trusted to make a mistake less than once a decade, and based on your previous posts you don’t think so.

@Desertfox:

… Also, why punish an addict? It is a waste of time. Just get rid of the dealers. Problem solved.

lol. Just two words why it won’t work:
supply - demand.
you keep the demand existing, and cut the supply, hoping that noone will ever come to the idea that drug pushing with higher risk is an incentive for higher prices. True, the demand for high priced drugs will drop, but not to zero.

But then, as you think (or want):

The Jury must approve any capital punishment by 3/4 vote.

i don’t see too much use in arguing with you.

@F_alk:

@Desertfox:

… Also, why punish an addict? It is a waste of time. Just get rid of the dealers. Problem solved.

lol. Just two words why it won’t work:
supply - demand.
you keep the demand existing, and cut the supply, hoping that noone will ever come to the idea that drug pushing with higher risk is an incentive for higher prices. True, the demand for high priced drugs will drop, but not to zero.

Well, I hate to break it to everyone, but the drug trade into this country takes a backseat to many other things. To prove this you need look no further than Afganhistan…where local warlords are being paid off, and the US military explicity allows the opium trade to flourish.

Honestly it doesn’t matter where opium is grown since it can be grown almost anywhere warm whether its Mexico, Turkey, Afghanistan, SE Asia etc.

Well, I hate to break it to everyone, but the drug trade into this country takes a backseat to many other things.

I disagree substance abuse problems are at the heart of what’s wrong with America. Whether its drugs or natural resources Americans have a problem with consumption, and this needs to be addressed. By in large from what I’ve seen most Americans lack impulse control, and moderation, both of which lead to larger social problems.

Even if you don’t answer, you might still read this:
What about hacking off the hands of thieves, stoning of adulterers … what else…
we could force women not to show any skin, so that men have no incentive to rape them…

And of course, Hitler and Stalin took as many non criminals and handled them the same… while fair trials were totally unknown, especially on the ethnical side.

Last, i don’t see the futility in showing the inhumanity in your beliefs.

gee, i better watch it, im so conservative it borders fascism. :o

@Desertfox:

@Deviant:Scripter:

Well, I hate to break it to everyone, but the drug trade into this country takes a backseat to many other things. To prove this you need look no further than Afganhistan…where local warlords are being paid off, and the US military explicity allows the opium trade to flourish.

Is opium illegal in Afganistan? If it is not then the US should not try to stop it. US laws do not apply to non-US citizens living in a foreign country.

North Korea has deemed chemical/biological/nuclear weapons legitimate, and classified them as conventional tactics. Do we not try to stop this?

You’re wrong. It’s better to take the fight overseas rather than let it reach our homeland, regardless of the price we have to pay. This holds true for the war on terrorism as well. :-? Better to fight them over there, than over here…

I can understand what you’re trying to say, but unfortunately the world does not work in that pipedream. The reality exists that countries do what they have to do, in order to ensure the safety of their country. But I do agree with you on one important point…the fact that US laws do not apply to non-US citizens…

@Deviant:Scripter:

@Desertfox:

@Deviant:Scripter:

Well, I hate to break it to everyone, but the drug trade into this country takes a backseat to many other things. To prove this you need look no further than Afganhistan…where local warlords are being paid off, and the US military explicity allows the opium trade to flourish.

Is opium illegal in Afganistan? If it is not then the US should not try to stop it. US laws do not apply to non-US citizens living in a foreign country.

North Korea has deemed chemical/biological/nuclear weapons legitimate, and classified them as conventional tactics. Do we not try to stop this?

You’re wrong. It’s better to take the fight overseas rather than let it reach our homeland, regardless of the price we have to pay. This holds true for the war on terrorism as well. :-? Better to fight them over there, than over here…

I can understand what you’re trying to say, but unfortunately the world does not work in that pipedream. The reality exists that countries do what they have to do, in order to ensure the safety of their country. But I do agree with you on one important point…the fact that US laws do not apply to non-US citizens…

how many USies think like you do? If it is more than a few percent, then the reason for 9/11 becomes considerably clearer to me.

@Deviant:Scripter:

You’re wrong. It’s better to take the fight overseas rather than let it reach our homeland, regardless of the price we have to pay. This holds true for the war on terrorism as well. :-? Better to fight them over there, than over here…

How non economic.
If the price to fight here is less than to fight there … why would you bring the fight there?

The reality exists that countries do what they have to do, in order to ensure the safety of their country. But I do agree with you on one important point…the fact that US laws do not apply to non-US citizens…

“to ensure safety of their country” … the point is that europe has been through this, when nations tried to ensure “their safety” by thinking for what is best for them only, working uni- or bilaterally. Then still, there was the need for major conferences of all major powers. And still, exactly this thinking lead to WWI. Know your history, and learn.
For the “US laws don’t apply to non-US citizens” … have you even thought of the obvious?
Te terrorists attacks on New York were done by non-US citizens … YAY! there was nothing wrong with them then, no laws broken !
I should really come over and burn down your house … YAY! i did nothing illegal!!