Laws shouldn't be based on morality - General

[QUOTE=Lankist;17124773]Then why don't you ban yourself instead of drugs?[/QUOTE] Who said I wanted to ban drugs? Again, you're assuming Stop assuming

[QUOTE=SickJits;17124916]Who said I wanted to ban drugs? Again, you're assuming Stop assuming[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=SickJits;17123050]So, by your logic, the thousands of people doing this should not face any repremands because it's only harming themselves and their keeping to themselves? That's stupid. In three, four months most of these people lose their jobs because of their inability to function properly at work, lose their home, get methrot (tooth decay) and become homeless. While jails may not be completely drug free, it's a shit load harder to get them their and costs alot more to maintain a habit.[/QUOTE] He's assuming because you gave him ample reason to.

Oh hey, JohnnyMo1 and Lankist acting like amoral dickheads. What a shocker. I'm staying the fuck out of this thread.

[QUOTE=Wangman;17125747]Oh hey, JohnnyMo1 and Lankist acting like amoral dickheads. What a shocker. I'm staying the fuck out of this thread.[/QUOTE] Yeah man only total DICKHEADS want individual rights and responsibility and want law grounded in logic.

[QUOTE=Wangman;17125747]Oh hey, JohnnyMo1 and Lankist acting like amoral dickheads. What a shocker. I'm staying the fuck out of this thread.[/QUOTE] Don't post just to post that you aren't going to post.

[QUOTE=JohnnyMo1;17125805]Yeah man only total DICKHEADS want individual rights and responsibility and want law grounded in logic.[/QUOTE] Liberal. [QUOTE=Lankist;17125814]Don't post just to post that you aren't going to post.[/QUOTE] Fuck you.

[QUOTE=Uberkitty;17108171]In my opinion, laws should only serve to protect people and establishments from each other. Legislators should not make laws prohibiting victimless crimes and crimes which only harm one's self. I believe that laws which criminalize victimless crimes restrict personal freedoms while exhausting the capacity of prisons. This is why blue laws, laws restricting gambling, and drug laws are complete bullshit. Laws should only be in place to protect people from direct harm, such as the loss of property or bodily harm. My point is this: If it harms no one or only harms one's self it should be fully legal.[/QUOTE] The only reason we view things as to be 'wrong' is because it is morally wrong to kill someone or hurt someone. There is no reason why killing someone is bad besides it is morally wrong, but morals govern our way of life and to think of laws without morals would not exist. Everyone comes from morals, the things we allow and disallow. Not to say the government doesn't stretch it sometimes, but they only stretch it to you. Because your morals are morals of freedom, your morals say that the government shouldn't infringe on people's rights (and by rights I mean the things that you consider to be rights). At the end of the day, even if the government followed your 'morals', there would still be a post like this, though it would be asking 'for' morals when in reality, it is impossible to escape them.

[QUOTE=Wangman;17125827]Liberal.[/QUOTE] Hey guys, it's an insult that's not an insult.

[QUOTE=JohnnyMo1;17125870]Hey guys, it's an insult that's not an insult.[/QUOTE] If you don't find something inherently wrong with liberals, you either ARE one, or are just totally fucking insane. Judging by your posts and your avatar, both.

[QUOTE=Wangman;17125906]Judging by your posts and your avatar, both.[/QUOTE] :cthulhu: [editline]05:18PM[/editline] [QUOTE=Wangman;17125906]If you don't find something inherently wrong with liberals, you either ARE one, or are just totally fucking insane.[/QUOTE] Or you're a neo-Nazi. Or Ann Coulter. [editline]05:19PM[/editline] Yeah we crazy liberals, wanting our logical laws and rights for people

Who says your logic and rights are correct There's really no good or evil in this world

[QUOTE=Mr. Mcguffin;17118591]When someone is caught cheating on their partner, the partner often becomes enraged. There are thousands of cases where that rage has resulted in destruction of property, or even murder. Therefor, adultery should be outlawed.[/QUOTE] I can't rationalize this. I still think it isn't thought crime or facism. The same way regulating and banning certain explosives isn't a thought crime either.

[QUOTE=Oecleus;17126269]I can't rationalize this. I still think it isn't thought crime or facism. The same way regulating and banning certain explosives isn't a thought crime either.[/QUOTE] Except, as Lankist said, explosives are far more dangerous, and you can get them if you prove yourself competent enough to handle them by obtaining the proper licenses.

[QUOTE=Mr. Mcguffin;17126314]Except, as Lankist said, explosives are far more dangerous, and you can get them if you prove yourself competent enough to handle them by obtaining the proper licenses.[/QUOTE] Why couldn't we do the same to drugs? People who abuse drugs and are at risk of causing violence for money or drugs should have their privileges removed.

[QUOTE=Oecleus;17126354]Why couldn't we do the same to drugs? People who abuse drugs and are at risk of causing violence for money or drugs should have their privileges removed.[/QUOTE] Well how do you figure we do that?

[QUOTE=Mr. Mcguffin;17126388]Well how do you figure we do that?[/QUOTE] Make licensing.

[QUOTE=Oecleus;17126354]Why couldn't we do the same to drugs? People who abuse drugs and are at risk of causing violence for money or drugs should have their privileges removed.[/QUOTE] Uhh, we do. It's called discretionary probation. I've mentioned that seven times. [editline]05:49PM[/editline] [QUOTE=Oecleus;17126401]Make licensing.[/QUOTE] No. You don't need a license to drink. People who get DUI's often go on probation in which it is ILLEGAL for them to drink. [editline]05:50PM[/editline] [QUOTE=Oecleus;17126269]I can't rationalize this. I still think it isn't thought crime or facism. The same way regulating and banning certain explosives isn't a thought crime either.[/QUOTE] Explosives explode. Crack doesn't. [editline]05:52PM[/editline] [QUOTE=Wangman;17125827]Fuck you.[/QUOTE] Fuck me? No. [img]http://blogs.seattleweekly.com/dailyweekly/scarface-photo-scarface-6229381.jpg[/img]

[QUOTE=Lankist;17126500] Explosives explode. Crack doesn't.[/QUOTE] The production of meth can be dangerous, so is the crime that is assosicated with it.

[QUOTE=Oecleus;17126626]The production of meth can be dangerous, so is the crime that is assosicated with it.[/QUOTE] The production of car batteries can be dangerous. That's why we regulate their production and ensure they aren't made in trailers. [editline]05:55PM[/editline] The production of meth is only dangerous because there is no industrial infrastructure enforcing safety.

[QUOTE=billeh!;17108347]Drug laws protect people from serious drugs like heroin etc. Unless, you're only talking about laws restricting mildly-harmful to non-harmful and non-addictive controlled substances, then I have to agree with you only partially.[/QUOTE] Heroine causes physical harm to one person. The user. People need not be protected from themselves.

[QUOTE=Lankist;17126640]The production of car batteries can be dangerous. That's why we regulate their production and ensure they aren't made in trailers. [editline]05:55PM[/editline] The production of meth is only dangerous because there is no industrial infrastructure enforcing safety.[/QUOTE] there is still problems with the addiction of meth, this is why I'm confused how you can rationalize eliminating certain explosives, yet still want all drugs to be legal.

[QUOTE=Oecleus;17126700]there is still problems with the addiction of meth, this is why I'm confused how you can rationalize eliminating certain explosives, yet still want all drugs to be legal.[/QUOTE] People can take meth and not murder other people. Explosives are a huge fucking safety risk to everyone in the immediate vicinity. That's why they can only be stored in low-population areas. Goddamnit, how many fucking times do I have to say this? [editline]06:07PM[/editline] Also you outright IGNORED the point on discretionary probation.

[QUOTE=Lankist;17126852]People can take meth and not murder other people. Explosives are a huge fucking safety risk to everyone in the immediate vicinity. That's why they can only be stored in low-population areas. Goddamnit, how many fucking times do I have to say this?[/QUOTE] Explosives can be handled safely, you are commiting thought crimes and facism. [QUOTE=Lankist;17126852]Also you outright IGNORED the point on discretionary probation.[/QUOTE] I didn't, believe me.

People need to be protected from themselves, regardless of whether they like it or not.

[QUOTE=Oecleus;17126896]Explosives can be handled safely, you are commiting thought crimes and facism.[/quote] Yes, they can, which is why people can own them. [quote]I didn't, believe me.[/QUOTE] Then acknowledge it. [editline]06:11PM[/editline] You need to read Title 27

[QUOTE=Lankist;17126925]Yes, they can, which is why people can own them.[/QUOTE] With a bunch of hassle. You want freedom of drugs for everyone until they fuck up, why can't we make an explosives store and punish them after they mess up with them?

[QUOTE=Oecleus;17127039]With a bunch of hassle. You want freedom of drugs for everyone until they fuck up, why can't we make an explosives store and punish them after they mess up with them?[/QUOTE] Nobody is saying do not regulate drugs. How many fucking times are you going to repeat yourself?

[QUOTE=Lankist;17127062]Nobody is saying do not regulate drugs. How many fucking times are you going to repeat yourself?[/QUOTE] I'm done, you are correct.

Thank god you're done. Freedom isn't a bad thing, and people do not need to be protected from themselves. It's a waste of money, and a waste of time. We already have a system in place that punishes you after you fuck up, who cares why you fuck up? Not every meth user kills someone, in fact, a SMALL minority do, a small, and punishable minority. Very small percentile of drug users have ever killed anyone. Punishing all drug users because a small group does is like what they did with Japanese americans in WW2. You can't use sweeping generalities when there is no majority at fault for legislation.

If the OP is talking about drugs, they inevitably harm another person, and suicide can harm another person. Thus, the government just makes it all illegal entirely.