This forum makes everyone else look like right wingers when we're not and 9/10 threads here are authored by staff. I dont even know why a car forum needs a political section. Cars and politics clearly dont mix or other members would post here. Please close this dead forum, its embarrassing. I dont even want to tag cars with nico cards for fear of them finding this place and associating me with it

+1 well said!

Telcoman

Most car forums have off-topic sections. And besides, this is where I go to to get my daily dose of right-wing balance.

Most car forums have off-topic sections. And besides, this is where I go to to get my daily dose of right-wing balance. ImStricken's posts are just adorable.
Edit: Hmm..wonder why it did that.

OP, don't like the forum, don't come here.

Howie, you are so full of **** it's stunning. You love dumping your left wing BS here. We save you from yelling at your mirror.

s0m3th1ng, because you touch yourself.

To say 'if you dont like dont come here' is the kind of reply id expect from an immature right winger, not from staff...

I thought general chat was for off topic discussion, so that makes this forum completely useless...which is why no one posts here except for staff and some right wingers.

Way to go right to the ad hominem while attempting to appear enlightened.

It's a simple concept guy. You came here to announce how offended you are.

It would be like a militant Christian walking into a mosque so he could say he was uncomfortable or a Klan member going to an NAACP event so he could do the same, etc. Nobody extended you an invitation so your presence here and your subsequent state of butthurt is 100% your doing. By your own construct that makes you a right winger. Howie, dude, I'm sorry, man, see you at CPAC bro.

News flash, things are not deemed viable just because you like them. Politics in general must turn your screws really hard. All those people who refuse to fall in to lock step behind your omnipotent persona. I could not fault you for rejecting contrasting viewpoints when so confronted. It's the behavior children display when their parents kick them out and they start to notice that the rest of the world doesn't give a crap what they think or if they feel validated.

Go away if you are unhappy here. Just leave and let the people who wish to participate do so. I'll draw you a diagram if the written word confounds you. In return I promise not to go to your my little pony forum.

I like how your reply was basically a 'u mad bro' post when you're the one who's really butt hurt since i wasnt the one who typed a multi paragraph response to a post of only 2 sentences, lmao.

P.s. your sig fits you since wile e coyete was always the one who got the short end of the stick courtesy of road runner. In this case, im the road runner. Beep beep.

I ain't mad at all. It's obvious you have no clue who I am and how I roll. You were designed for my entertainment.

You misspelled Coyote by the way and you didn't capitalize Road Runner, a proper name nor the i in "I'm."

Public school strikes again. Beep beep.

And you continue to post in a forum you claim only right wingers post in, silly.

davidoliva wrote:To say 'if you dont like dont come here' is the kind of reply id expect from an immature right winger, not from staff...

Well, now you're going to hear it from a hardcore Libertarian.

davidoliva wrote:I dont even want to tag cars with nico cards for fear of them finding this place and associating me with it

I'd be more concerned about people thinking all of our members are arrogant enough to think that just because they don't like something, that it should go away.

Thanks for your suggestion, but unless you have something intelligently-written and useful to contribute, I think we'll keep this one open and available to the people who do like to frequent it.

Be well.

davidoliva wrote:This forum makes everyone else look like right wingers when we're not and 9/10 threads here are authored by staff. I dont even know why a car forum needs a political section. Cars and politics clearly dont mix or other members would post here. Please close this dead forum, its embarrassing. I dont even want to tag cars with nico cards for fear of them finding this place and associating me with it

Embarrassing? How is it embarrassing exactly? Someone elses political alignment shouldn't be embarrassing at all, nor does it in any way shape or form, reflect on you personally.

Whether or not this particular section is slow shouldn't bother you either.

Have you considered that perhaps you're tagging cars that don't happen to belong to Liberals? God forbid they have a different political affiliation then yourself right? That would be embarrassing wouldn't it?

If you don't want to be associated with Nico, that's your decision. If you want to let someone elses political views bog down your own character, that's your choice. Just realize it's YOU making the choice, not anyone else.

Here's some advice, don't sweat the small stuff...and it's ALL small stuff.

WD

Typical liberal.

davidoliva wrote:I'm offended, therefore it should cease to exist.

WDRacing wrote: Embarrassing? How is it embarrassing exactly? Someone elses political alignment shouldn't be embarrassing at all, nor does it in any way shape or form, reflect on you personally.

The only reason I could think of that you would be embarrassed by this forum is that you don't have the capability of defending your own ideals sufficiently, which makes you ashamed of your own political affiliation. News flash, most of us in here aren't conservative, but rather independent/libertarian.

So yes, let's shut this forum down because someone's butthurt over not being able to sufficiently defend their stance because it's so riddled with holes that it would be like trying to build a rowboat out of a cheese grater. Left wing logic strikes again.

Most people are not "liberal" or "conservative", but have a mishmash of views on different topics, even if they strongly self-identify with one of the "sides".

It's unfortionate when simply the word that one of the (not very repersentative) parties in washington uses to talk about themselves, is such a powerful ad hominem attack and is seen as totally discrediting any views that one may hold.

It is unfortionate when, in order to be involved in something like cars, one must either totally agree with very outspoken absolutist conservativism, or be talked down and ostracized. I don't think there's any communists here, why is "liberal" such a powerful word?

I don't know about you guys, but I would gladly pay much more in taxes, if my state could keep the roads good enough that I'm not afraid of breaking a rim or getting high centered when I drive around my town.... there's literally roads here with holes big enough that I could total my 240 on them (especially at night), more taxes I say.

So.... yeah, I agree with the thread about being very strict with welfare, such that people are taken care of but not babied, no want but no luxury.... but I still think we should have higher taxes in my state (if not federally), to deal with serious problems. I guess I'm a dirty liberal, and as such, have no place around cars, ehh?

It's one of those barriers that keeps fun things like cars and shooting associated with a political philosophy that is as go-nowhere as the far left, and that is generally aggressive and intimidating.

That said, I'd gladly rock nico stickers, I don't know what that's about.... but some of the politics seems to be a bit like "lalala I'm not listening and you're not just like me so you're LIBERAL and hate freedom"

People are the way they are. I argue with TMS all the time, we're both staff and we're both "on the same side". Yet we still argue. That doesn't mean we can't have beers and build cars together. It just means we're individuals. I'm happy to be different.

I guess what needs to be said is something along the lines of grow the F up. Stand where you stand and be proud of it. But don't make demands based on others disagreeing with you...that sort of thing makes me sick. I disagree with people all the time about a whole range of topics. If they disagree with me I don't get all upset about it. Usually we argue back and forth...it's called converfukcinsation.

My "best friend" is a bleeding heart Liberal, I'd take a bullet for him. Disagreeing about politics shouldn't own you. If it does, you're a weak d!ck puss and you have no tolerance for others. Whether you realize it or not, that's being part of the problem, not any part of the solution.

davidoliva wrote:1. Please close this dead forum, its embarrassing.
2. This forum makes everyone else look like right wingers.
3. id expect from an immature right winger, not from staff.
4. which is why no one posts here except for staff and some right wingers.

lets get something straight, pal:

1. every car forum, and any major forum has an "off-topic" section that includes news, politics, etc

2. its clear you have an agenda, asking for this section to get closed. its clear since you use political slurs for those you dont agree with. its also TYPICAL OF A LEFTY TO WANT OPPOSITE THOUGHTS/IDEA/POLTICS/etc TO BE SILENCED.

3. if this forum was filled with hippy loving buIIshlt, you magically wouldn't calling for it to be shut down. whats the matter, you dont have the testicular fortitude to allow opposing views? welcome to the real world, where people live and think differently than you - and everyone HAS to get along. those who dont like something - simply walk away.

Here is some advice that is bound to blow your mind: IF YOU DONT LIKE SOMETHING, DONT WATCH/DO/BUY/READ/PARTAKE IN IT. how f-ing typical a lefty demands something he/she doesn't agree with; be removed/banned.
just take a look, at how typical it is:
liberals dont like guns - so they want them banned
liberals dont like eating meat - so they try to block hunting
liberals dont like Christians - so they try and ban Christianity in every possible option
liberals dont agree with civilian gun ownership - so they want certain guns banned, and bully gun owners (by publishing their names)
davidoliva doesn't agree with the majorty of the threads being discussed in our politics section - so he wants it closed. (dont see a common theme?)

SO MUCH FOR BEING "TOLERANT" & "OPEN MINDED" not

telcoman wrote:+1 well said!

Telcoman

you are a freaking hypocrite! i have watched you spill your liberal drivel for days, weeks, on end.
you are lucky i like you boy... or id shove potatoes up your G's exhaust lolol

stricken, you realize that their are conservatives who try to censor just as much as liberals do.

It's easy for either side to cherry-pick examples of why the other side is bad, because we're talking about, in the US, around, what, 175 million people per side? or have I got my population messed up? Either way, when it's half the population, it's pretty easy to find good or bad things about either side.

If one was inclined to, it would not be hard to cherry pick you as an example of how all conservatives see in black and white and love ranting about some great unified front of liberal-ness.

Why not just pick your own personal position of the best stances on each individual issue, instead of screaming absolutist views about how half the country is evil, from the highest rooftops you can?

mechanicalmoron wrote:stricken, you realize that their are conservatives who try to censor just as much as liberals do.

lets call a spade a spade - which side is known for this slogan: "if we dont agree with it, it must be banned, taxed, or heavily regulated"?

aside from drugs, and abortions - the right doesn't seem to give a flying F what you do in your personal life. on the other hand, the left seems to mingle in every freaking thing i do, wear, buy, eat, drive, etc. and god forbid i have something the "disenfranchised" dont - then i am liable to share.

...wait till he finds our outdoors/guns thread. he's gonna really blow his mind. lol i think greg should be ready to receive a 3 page tirade about how 'guns kill' and nico shouldn't help host the bloodshed lol

ImStricken wrote:

mechanicalmoron wrote:stricken, you realize that their are conservatives who try to censor just as much as liberals do.

lets call a spade a spade - which side is known for this slogan: "if we dont agree with it, it must be banned, taxed, or heavily regulated"?

aside from drugs, and abortions - the right doesn't seem to give a flying F what you do in your personal life. on the other hand, the left seems to mingle in every freaking thing i do, wear, buy, eat, drive, etc. and god forbid i have something the "disenfranchised" dont - then i am liable to share.

I generally hear that slogan from both sides: in describing what they imagine the other side to be like.

As far as drugs, I think libertarians want them all legal, and to make government smaller. Are you saying that you're the sort of traitorous conservative who claims to be conservative, but believes in big government telling what they can eat, inhale, or inject?

As to what you drive, I just recently made a device to make my car considerably dirtier, for like a single horsepower (it's weight probably cancels out the effect. Maybe it will at least sound cool), but I still understand the need to preserve the earth so that we all, you know, survive, have gas to play with in the future, and all that good stuff - don't you?

Moderation in all things, including highly left or right leanings in politics. Clearly I don't agree with the OP to close the forum, it does seem to be a wimpy childish answer to losing it politics. But absolutism doesn't help anybody, especially with aggressive blindly hateful rhetoric that will neither lead anyone to see anything your way, nor help you understand the problems. Being ready to see everything as liberal or conservative (no matter which side one self-identifies as) and thus good or evil is not conducive to actually fixing any problem, regardless of your position on the problem.

I experienced this before, when posting about politics here: whenever someone says something sensible that some posters don't want to, or can't, address, they scream "LIBERAL" to drown it out. If you can address the issues, that would be nice, but "liberal" is not a reason, answer, comeback, insult, or really anything. It's just like "conservative": what half the country screams when they don't have a real, legitimate answer or solution.

mechanicalmoron wrote:As far as drugs, I think libertarians want them all legal, and to make government smaller. Are you saying that you're the sort of traitorous conservative who claims to be conservative, but believes in big government telling what they can eat, inhale, or inject?

a. i cant even begin to explain to you what drugs have done to people, families, neighborhoods. and frankly i only care about what drugs have done to the lives of women & children. women are raped by men high on pcp, meth, bath salts, etc. children pimped out for crack money, etc. if you stand up for drugs - you need to spend more time in the slums near you. you'll understand what i mean. "drugs" is not all about happy peaceful college kids in mom's basement.

b. i refuse to financially support cartels. they abuse women & children in the production of their product. if marlboro starts growing pot here - different story. for now, most of the pot coming here, morally has blood on it - and i wont have blood on my hands.

I just recently made a device to make my car considerably dirtier. but I still understand the need to preserve the earth

do you, bro.
and while 'doin you', stay out of my business. if a politician tomorrow in your area made it mandatory to own guns, hunt, drive a diesel pickup truck, drink bud light, and watch nascar (you know, all the things liberals think conservatives do on the weekend?) - i dont think you'd be too happy. so the hell with those who rant and rally trying to stop be from being who i am, and doing what i want (eating meat, owning guns, wearing leather, buying dogs from puppy stores, etc).

PS (just so its clear)
i:

• own guns
  refuse to hunt (dont like hurting animals)
  am ok with abortions
  never watched nascar
  only once in the blue wear camo

ImStricken wrote:

mechanicalmoron wrote:As far as drugs, I think libertarians want them all legal, and to make government smaller. Are you saying that you're the sort of traitorous conservative who claims to be conservative, but believes in big government telling what they can eat, inhale, or inject?

i cant even begin to explain to you what drugs have done to people, families, neighborhoods. and frankly i only care about what drugs have done to the lives of women & children. women are raped by men high on pcp, meth, bath salts, etc. children pimped out for crack money, etc. if you stand up for drugs - you need to spend more time in the slums near you. you'll understand what i mean. "drugs" is not all about happy peaceful college kids in mom's basement.

b. i refuse to financially support cartels. they abuse women & children in the production of their product. if marlboro starts growing pot here - different story. for now, most of the pot coming here, morally has blood on it - and i wont have blood on my hands.

I just recently made a device to make my car considerably dirtier. but I still understand the need to preserve the earth

do you, bro.
and while 'doin you', stay out of my business. if a politician tomorrow in your area made it mandatory to own guns, hunt, drive a diesel pickup truck, drink bud light, and watch nascar (you know, all the things liberals think conservatives do on the weekend) - i dont think you'd be too happy. so the hell with those who rant and rally trying to stop be from being who i am, and doing what i want (eating meat, owning guns, hunting, wearing leather, buying dogs from puppy stores, etc).

I still don't get it.

You are talking about the horrible social cost of drug prohibition, but, though you hint at it being a problem caused by prohibition, you don't seem to see that the solution is to stop prohibiting. Obviously I don't think drugs are good for people, but banning them doesn't stop anyone from doing them, it just makes it very lucrative to sell them, to the point that violence is routine, and it involves all sorts of people who would otherwise not be condemned to that life. It's the same as any other type of prohibition: not only does it simply not work, it hurts people. I agree, nobody should be pimped for crack or shot for meth, so teach people the reality of it (not with scare-mongering, but with the real facts. No "brain on drugs" eggs, just the real facts about what it does to you and your life, they're much scarier than some stupid girl wrecking a kitchen and breaking eggs everywhere.) I don't think drugs should be full-on legal, but look at portugal: great success, according to everyone but the US, by saying okay, this is a problem, let us HELP you, instead of lock you up. The whole drug problem is conservatives stifling that free market, and of course, as their own theoriticians say, the free market finds a way.

As for a politician passing a law saying that I have to be steryotipically conservative? If you made it budweiser instead of bud light, and removed nascar (somewhere between the most exciting version of traffic and the most boring version of racing) I wouldn't mind a bit. But that doesn't seem to jibe with how I think you where just calling me some sort of prius driving liberal, along with anyone else who didn't agree with you.

I wish I had a diesel truck. Maybe if I pretend to like bud light and nascar, one would find me

But do understand, I'm not calling you a conservative in any sort of bad way, or anything. I'm saying that radicals on either side can't see things in a balanced way, and if your answer for any problem involves either conservatives or liberals, you might be leaning a radical way. More often than not the problem is an inibility of the two to cooperate (and a government that represents neither, but uses the radicals who see black and white on each side to stay elected).

mechanicalmoron wrote:You are talking about the horrible social cost of drug prohibition, but, though you hint at it being a problem caused by prohibition, you don't seem to see that the solution is to stop prohibiting.

riiiiight... and the solution to stop mass murders is to stop prohibiting "assault" rifles? that thought would blow a liberals mind.
we cant allow drugs and mind altering drugs to be passed around as if it was a bottle of beer. one hit of pcp and the person is no longer human. someone on ketamin mixed with extacy will no longer be in reality. they are capable of anything. why do liberals want that? its dangerous. its bad enough we have alcohol and Rx pills available - and thats growing out of control. every teenie bopper and hollywood a-hole has a DWi and a drug charge. legalizing drugs wont reduce their lethality, temporary incapacitation, permanent brain damage, and health risks.

if someone refuses to follow the current laws, and still uses drugs - that person is addicted. they are either addicted or simply a scumbag with no self control. give this scumbag full access to now legalized drugs and he/she will be the reason someone else's life is ruined or taken away from them. people who refuse to follow current laws, will break tomorrow's laws too.

case in point: i want a fully automatic weapon. but its against the law for me to own. do i go and find one illegally? do i mod an ar15 to shoot in fully auto? do i buy a gock18 under the radar? no i dont. you know why i dont? - because i have respect for the laws (even if they are stupid). because i fear going to jail and no longer being a productive member of society. i fear ruining my life. i fear not being able to provide for my future family. if i didnt care about any of the aforementioned, and still went and bought that auto weapon from some street dealer - and then simply said: "im not hurting anyone, the laws are stupid and archaic so i ignore them." i dont think that would fly.

well, a large portion of america and common day potheads dont follow the current laws, and think we are all to respect them and simply change the laws because a large portion of our society seems to ignore the laws. it doesnt work that way. just because a large amount of people are doing stupid s*** doesnt mean we are all to follow in their footsteps, or legalize it.

Obviously I don't think drugs are good for people, but banning them doesn't stop anyone from doing them, it just makes it very lucrative to sell them, to the point that violence is routine, and it involves all sorts of people who would otherwise not be condemned to that life.

I HAVE NEVER USED A SINGLE DRUG. SO TELL ME HOW 'MAGICALLY' I AM NOT INVOLVED IN THAT LIFE? what you said is total bull. legalizing will still create the same useless dirtbags we have today. they will wont work normal jobs, they still will suck as parents, they still will sell their kids for another hit, they still will cause crime to perpetuate their lifestyle.

look at portugal: great success

sure lets look at portugal. a country riddled with lazy folks who refuse to grow their society and a near 18% jobless rate. MILLIONS of prostitutes who roam the streets looking for cash in exchange for sex, or drugs in exchange for sex. an economy that has suffered from to much of the FIESTA/free drugs lifestyle. (PS: drugs are not fully legal in portugal - personal consumption amounts is the only legal amounts one can have. and anyone found to be a problem doesnt go to jail, they go to rehab. yes rehab, in a country that cant afford to feed its normal people.)

Exactly: you make the right choices, you are not on drugs and you do not have illegal weapons. But millions of people take drugs, and millions of people have illegal automatic weapons. Something is clearly not working.

I don't think that drugs should be legal, but I see no reason to make it harder to climb out of the hole of addiction with legal barriers. Of course there will still be worthless addicts, just like there are worthless alcoholics, but once people are able to come forward and try to get help, you can try to make things better, and you can seperate the urge to do nothing and sit around on drugs from the urge to shoot people for a monopoly on drugs to make money.

I was not saying portugal is a success overall, but it's drug policy of tolerating personal use amounts have been a great success in the treatment of drug use, and in the overall numbers of users and addicts. Making prostitution or drugs illegal, just like making guns or some kinds of guns illegal, does not make the problem go away, but makes it much more damaging to the people who are involved in it. And it creates a culture of law-breaking, of lack of respect for the government, and creates a governmental culture of regarding everyone as criminals, because they might be criminals, which in turn leads to stripping the constitution bare, on the alleged grounds that it must be done to catch bad guys. Why should the second amendment be so respected by conservatives, if no other part of the constitution, explicet or impliced, from the implicit foundation with the declaration of independance and it's statements about individual freedoms, to explicit bill of rights, is too important to be cast down in the name of watching what people do, because they might break laws?

Stupid people do stupid things, and the law does not stop them. However, a bad law can make their stupidity hurt undeserving bystanders, or prevent the necessary discovery and intervention to keep kids from becomming wastes like their parents, or whatever else.

Would you do PCP if it was legal, or at least tolerated? I'm going to go out on a limb, and say that you would not. But it would make it much easier to track down problem users, violent individuals, and that sort of thing, all without wiping our asses on the constitution.

I'd have a much easier time taking your views on individual liberties seriously, including how you see things in black and white, if you could be more consistant about them all. You can't selectively throw out freedom.

In the end, a free country needs to base laws on what actually hurts others. The happy college kids in their moms basemest you mention are hurting nobody, and there are millions of gun owners who hurt nobody. However, the laws about both guns and drugs lead millions to be hurt only because some people are so bent on breaking the laws to make money or gain personal power, and not being caught.

This is what I mean when I say that conservatives and liberals both betray what they claim their cause to be, and when someone mentions their own illogical position, they just call that person a convervative/liberal, as though that solves it. And all that bi-partisan crap is just fighting about the things they already really agree on, and ignoring the problem areas.

please dont put the illegal act of obtaining the drugs on the same level as the violent crimes perpetuated while on drugs, or hunting for them/fund for them. i could care less about drug transactions - i care about the innocent people killed by stoned idiots, and hungry crackheads.

i dont want people that ordinarily would have been scared away from doing drugs - getting hooked after the first or 2nd hit because drugs are now legalized.

like i said, go to any hood - and spend a weekend over night (and buy a police scanner) and walk around. see the women, see the children, see the homes & neighborhoods. while well off kids are handing cash to drug dealers - that cash then funds the sexual abuse of women & children. F-that. if i was POTUS - all drug related crimes would have a 4 step process:

• 1st conviction: 30 days n jail, $1,000 fine for all court expenses and room & board while in jail. (no record of arrest/incarceration will be had if you remain problem free for 1 year)
  2nd conviction: 180 days in jail, forfeiture of any public assistance, $5,000 fine for all court expenses and room & board while in jail. (no record of arrest/incarceration will be had if you remain problem free for 5 years)
  3rd conviction: 1 year in jail, $5,000 fine, forfeiture of any public assistance, mandatory labor camp while incarcerated
  4th conviction: life term in a shock camp or labor prison (your choice).

this revolving door we have now, is a sick system. scum walks in - scum walks out with a record and is useless in society due to criminal record. (and whats the democrats idea to stop this? stop allowing employers to ask for criminal records. ya ok!) so they go right back to drugs. they start making money through crime, sexual exploitation, drugs, etc. if someone is that useless, to acquire a 4th conviction = your useless to society, so you go away forever. you are no longer allowed freedom. you are no longer allowed to exploit society. you refused to work, pay taxes, and provide = so now you are in a labor prison.

tough love breads tough men. pussyfooting breads useless safe-space adult babies.

themadscientist wrote:

this thread actually did get saved. i really enjoyed chatting with mechanicalmoron . he has his views, i have mine. we both shared, discussed, probably walked away for a cigarette to then return - but we (like 2 men) shared idea's. thats the most important part here. i respect him. he clearly respects me. if we followed in the direction the davidoliva wanted is to go to = none of this would have been possible.

THIS THREAD IS PROOF, why our politics section works, and should stay up. if someone is to fair-weathered to partake, then its their issue (i hear parez hilton has a ubber cool politically correct blog one can read)

ImStricken wrote:please dont put the illegal act of obtaining the drugs on the same level as the violent crimes perpetuated while on drugs, or hunting for them/fund for them. i could care less about drug transactions - i care about the innocent people killed by stoned idiots, and hungry crackheads.

i dont want people that ordinarily would have been scared away from doing drugs - getting hooked after the first or 2nd hit because drugs are now legalized.

like i said, go to any hood - and spend a weekend over night (and buy a police scanner) and walk around. see the women, see the children, see the homes & neighborhoods. while well off kids are handing cash to drug dealers - that cash then funds the sexual abuse of women & children. F-that. if i was POTUS - all drug related crimes would have a 4 step process:

• 1st conviction: 30 days n jail, $1,000 fine for all court expenses and room & board while in jail. (no record of arrest/incarceration will be had if you remain problem free for 1 year)
  2nd conviction: 180 days in jail, forfeiture of any public assistance, $5,000 fine for all court expenses and room & board while in jail. (no record of arrest/incarceration will be had if you remain problem free for 5 years)
  3rd conviction: 1 year in jail, $5,000 fine, forfeiture of any public assistance, mandatory labor camp while incarcerated
  4th conviction: life term in a shock camp or labor prison (your choice).

this revolving door we have now, is a sick system. scum walks in - scum walks out with a record and is useless in society due to criminal record. (and whats the democrats idea to stop this? stop allowing employers to ask for criminal records. ya ok!) so they go right back to drugs. they start making money through crime, sexual exploitation, drugs, etc. if someone is that useless, to acquire a 4th conviction = your useless to society, so you go away forever. you are no longer allowed freedom. you are no longer allowed to exploit society. you refused to work, pay taxes, and provide = so now you are in a labor prison.

I must say, I don't live in an urban area, we have a bad side of town but that basically means it's a good place to find a cheap house, because there's no real crime there, or anywhere, I don't think there's been a homocide in this county since before I was born (which was not here, but still). So I admit, I don't see any of that. At the same time, I see that there are people here who use drugs and who I am very weary of, and there are those who are just fine. Of course, it tends to depend on the drugs they choose (obviously people who smoke marijuana are generally pretty harmless, if maybe a bit slowed down, while people who use meth are dangerous, violent, delusional, and unpredictable). I agree, it's better if people don't take drugs, of course, but I think it makes sense to take into account that beyond a certain level of harshness, it stops doing good and detering people, but starts causing new problems and actually supporting violent cartels.

Of course, I don't think that anyone should be forced to live in squalor, but I think that anyone abusing kids or women should be taken care of by the legal system. I think they're probably undereemable trash, be they sober trash or drug using trash, and either way, there's a charge for that. Maybe that charge is not enough, but then that should be fixed.

I would agree with a system that makes any crime committed on drugs a more serious crime, while simultaniously making simple drug possession a civil, as opposed to criminal, offence.

You know where a lot of those well-off people's money goes, after the slum? Mexico, or afghanistan. At the very least, we wouldn't have all our money leaving the country, if the trade could be contained here. You can't do anything about it once it's in some druglords cache, but if marlboro grew the stuff here, it would be here, going to US investors, and not funding our enemies.

I mean, we could say the same of alcohol: it leads to harder drugs, and it, in and of itself, is horribly addictive and ruins lives. But banning it just didn't help. I personally would argue that raising the drinking age to 21 is, in fact, immoral, just like I think other drugs should be usable at 18. I think we need to be free to make the wrong decision, as long as it doesn't hurt others, and if it does then there should be laws that protect those others. Besides, I really would not like alcohol illegal, I drink, though responsibly - and I would not pretend that I always have, I totally admit that a few years ago I drank totally irresponsibly, not in a way that would hurt others but that could have put me in danger. I'm glad that I'm okay and figured out how to approach that sort of thing, but I can't imagine it helping anything if I had gotten in legal trouble over it.

Is this all a bit hopelessly libertarian of me? Probably. But I think people should be free to do as they wish, if they don't hurt anybody else.

Sorry if this is a somewhat disjointed slew of opinions, that loosely relate to what you said. At any rate, I agree, thread saved, we're discussing problems and opinions, while OP just wanted to censor everything.