To Protect and to Serve II

[DEFENDTHISHOUSE]

That is the standard for a just law vs a bs law. Some laws are written in blood, some laws are written in sh!t.

Yup. Malum prohibitum vs Malum in se.

 

[hog88]

Again though you are missing the point that drug use and being intoxicated in public does damage property and hurt others.

And what would change if they were legal?

 

[hog88]

So let people drive drunk and high and wait for them to kill someone?

Yep, you stop a very minuscule amount of people from driving intoxicated, DUI laws are nothing but a money grab. Driving intoxicated shouldn’t be a crime, crashing intoxicated should be punished harshly.

 

[Rickyvol77]

And what would change if they were legal?

Nothing. That was the point. Legalization doesn’t do anything to solve the actual problem. All you can do is try to manage the damage from it

 

[Rickyvol77]

That is the standard for a just law vs a bs law. Some laws are written in blood, some laws are written in sh!t.

That’s not the fault of police officers

 

[DEFENDTHISHOUSE]

That’s not the fault of police officers

Why’s that?

 

[hog88]

Nothing. That was the point. Legalization doesn’t do anything to solve the actual problem. All you can do is try to manage the damage from it

The problem isn’t solvable and you’re not managing anything except helping to ruin peoples lives by throwing them in jail.

 

[Rickyvol77]

Yep, you stop a very minuscule amount of people from driving intoxicated, DUI laws are nothing but a money grab. Driving intoxicated shouldn’t be a crime, crashing intoxicated should be punished harshly.

No actually several thousand people are stopped from driving intoxicated daily. Even more are not. I also agree with you that it should be punished much more harshly. Especially in Tennessee.

But under your reasoning, we should never charge kids for throwing rocks off of overpasses unless it actually does hit someone.

 

[Rickyvol77]

Why’s that?

They don’t write the laws for one

 

[Rickyvol77]

The problem isn’t solvable and you’re not managing anything except helping to ruin peoples lives by throwing them in jail.

People ruin their own lives. Drug consequences speak for themselves. Work in a hospital sometime

 

[DEFENDTHISHOUSE]

They don’t write the laws for one

They do enforce these laws and you do have discretion, unless you’re an unthinking robot.

 

[hog88]

No actually several thousand people are stopped from driving intoxicated daily. Even more are not. I also agree with you that it should be punished much more harshly. Especially in Tennessee.

But under your reasoning, we should never charge kids for throwing rocks off of overpasses unless it actually does hit someone.

You don’t stop/prevent an 1/8th of people from driving drunk. If prevention was what you are aiming for you would set up at the bar and offer breathalyzer tests before people get into their cars instead of waiting for them to drive a mile down the road into your checkpoint.

 

[Rickyvol77]

They do enforce these laws and you do have discretion, unless you’re an unthinking robot.

This is true. But like I said, I don’t arrest everyone I meet on every call. I know the difference between a criminal and someone making a dumb mistake. Doesn’t mean I shouldn’t have a right to arrest the criminals

 

[hog88]

People ruin their own lives. Drug consequences speak for themselves. Work in a hospital sometime

Running a guy in for a bag of weed negatively impacts his life 100x more than him smoking it.

 

[Rickyvol77]

You don’t stop/prevent an 1/8th of people from driving drunk. If prevention was what you are aiming for you would set up at the bar and offer breathalyzer tests before people get into their cars instead of waiting for them to drive a mile down the road into your checkpoint.

I don’t do checkpoints, but what your saying isn’t factually correct. Also even if that was possible, there isn’t enough manpower to even act like that is a feasible idea

 

[midnight orange]

No actually several thousand people are stopped from driving intoxicated daily. Even more are not. I also agree with you that it should be punished much more harshly. Especially in Tennessee.

But under your reasoning, we should never charge kids for throwing rocks off of overpasses unless it actually does hit someone.

Throwing rocks off an overpass is an act that is intending to cause harm. Using substances is not.

 

[Rickyvol77]

Running a guy in for a bag of weed negatively impacts his life 100x more than him smoking it.

I don’t “run people in for a bag weed” unless there is something else there, they have more criminal history or it’s a dealer amount of weed

And the only person that ruined his or her life is the person who knowingly made a decision to commit a crime

 

[Rickyvol77]

Throwing rocks off an overpass is an act that is intending to cause harm. Using substances is not.

They said driving drunk or high. Which is the same as intending to cause harm

 

[hog88]

I don’t do checkpoints, but what your saying isn’t factually correct. Also even if that was possible, there isn’t enough manpower to even act like that is a feasible idea

i know it’s not feasible just like it’s not feasible for you to prevent drug use or driving intoxicated. We need to quit fighting loosing battles.

 

[Rickyvol77]

i know it’s not feasible just like it’s not feasible for you to prevent drug use or driving intoxicated. We need to quit fighting loosing battles.

We can’t prevent it all. But we do prevent some

 

[hog88]

I don’t “run people in for a bag weed” unless there is something else there, they have more criminal history or it’s a dealer amount of weed

And the only person that ruined his or her life is the person who knowingly made a decision to commit a crime

And that is why we fewer laws so fewer people commit crimes.

 

[davethevol]

Lmao guessing you are not a pharmacist

Studies have shown they’re getting into the water supply whether you flush them or pee them out. That stuff doesn’t break down very much in the body.

 

[hog88]

We can’t prevent it all. But we do prevent some

very very few.

 

[hog88]

They said driving drunk or high. Which is the same as intending to cause harm

No it’s not. There are millions of drunks on the road right this very minute who will get where they are going without incident.

 

[Rickyvol77]

And that is why we fewer laws so fewer people commit crimes.

We have laws against things like jaywalking. Those laws aren’t to harass some joker who is walking in the street. It’s because if someone is standing in the middle of the street being crazy, they put others in public at risk of injury. Your debate is should there be laws that attempt to prevent these kinds of issues (I.e. shooting a gun in the air, throwing rocks off overpasses, walking in traffic, riding a motorcycle on interstate while standing on it, driving without headlights at night). Yes you are not “intending” to hurt anyone but you absolutely are doing something reckless that could injure or kill someone. Your argument is no one should be bothered with these activities unless something actually happens