Obama or Romney?

[Seperates]

We are talking about legalization in America.

You are talking legalization in general and the Central American nations need more than that.

No, he was talking about American legalization. We all were talking about American legalization. Though legalizing it in Central America and the U.S. would really get rid of the violence. No police forces having shootouts with cartels, and not much market anywhere for it.

It's like the mafia and Prohibition. End prohibition and suddenly the mafia seems to be less influential.

[Seperates]

Then ban cigarettes already. I don't even smoke anything and I know those bastards don't even give you a high.

If I could, I would.
But I can't, so I won't.

So then we might as well stop trying to be moral bastards and dictate other people's lives.

[IshCong]

Health concerns, for the most part.
But, the more I talk about it, the more I wonder, so I'm not really firmly for either side at the moment.
But...that's probably a talk for another da...thread. xD

What health concerns though? The only ones that have any weight are if you smoke it heavily. At the right dosage, it as health benefits. The same is true with LSD.

Those health concerns, lol.
The health benefits are why I wonder, partially. I'm not sold on either side.

[Avenio]

Fair enough but they can still kill their rivals or burn down their homes and business's or rob them, like they do innocent people all the time.

In the short term, sure. But they'll start hemorrhaging money the moment that legalization is enacted, and once they start losing the funds to operate gangs and acquire weapons, they'll dissolve away. As someone said before, look at how fast the Prohibition-era gangs that funded themselves through the smuggling and production of alcohol disintegrated after Prohibition was repealed.

[IshCong]

If I could, I would.
But I can't, so I won't.

So then we might as well stop trying to be moral bastards and dictate other people's lives.

Considering cigarettes cause explicit harm to non-smokers on a regular basis, I have issues with them. Especially since I'm one of those non-smokers.

[Arkinesia]

I'm writing in Twilight Sparkle in 2012.

“Because You Might As Well Add A Punchline.”

[Condunum]

We are talking about legalization in America.

You are talking legalization in general and the Central American nations need more than that.

If you legalize in America, the Cartel's main profit source will shrink enough that they will have about the same power that bootleggers have.

[Seperates]

So then we might as well stop trying to be moral bastards and dictate other people's lives.

Considering cigarettes cause explicit harm to non-smokers on a regular basis, I have issues with them. Especially since I'm one of those non-smokers.

Then don't stand near them when they are smoking. Most smokers I know TRY to stay away from non-smokers... going so far as to stand outside in below-zero temperatures so that they can get their nicotine fix.

[The United Soviet Socialist Republic]

You are talking legalization in general and the Central American nations need more than that.

If you legalize in America, the Cartel's main profit source will shrink enough that they will have about the same power that bootleggers have.

They tried that in Amsterdam, it didnt work well for them.

[Seperates]

If you legalize in America, the Cartel's main profit source will shrink enough that they will have about the same power that bootleggers have.

They tried that in Amsterdam, it didnt work well for them.

Linky? Because I'm pretty sure it's been working well. Otherwise it would have been illegalized by now.

[Avenio]

They tried that in Amsterdam, it didnt work well for them.

The problem in Amsterdam isn't armed gangs, it's drug tourism. Different issue altogether.

[Seperates]

They tried that in Amsterdam, it didnt work well for them.

The problem in Amsterdam isn't armed gangs, it's drug tourism. Different issue altogether.

Which could be solved by legalizing it everywhere else so they don't become concentrated in one area.

[IshCong]

Considering cigarettes cause explicit harm to non-smokers on a regular basis, I have issues with them. Especially since I'm one of those non-smokers.

Then don't stand near them when they are smoking. Most smokers I know TRY to stay away from non-smokers... going so far as to stand outside in below-zero temperatures so that they can get their nicotine fix.

Yeah, I'll just never go home.
Or to my dorm room.
Or my workplace.
Or the park.
Or my school.

Yeah. That will work.
Not to mention its effects on medical care and insurance.

(This is also a topic for another thread though...)

[IshCong]

Considering cigarettes cause explicit harm to non-smokers on a regular basis, I have issues with them. Especially since I'm one of those non-smokers.

It's easy to avoid second hand smoke though. Not the smokers problem. They can't smoke inside(legally withing 50 feet of) a building here so I don't see why you are complaining. You must think you are better than them because you do not smoke...

It's not easy to avoid it when your dorm-mates and parents do it all the time.
Or your siblings, co-workers, and fellow students, who can and do smoke indoors. Because they can around here.
I don't think I'm better than them. I think they're addicted to a harmful product that's slowly killing them. Which makes me sad.
And I just don't want their addiction to kill me too.

EDIT: Considering they are smoking, and around me, there is most certainly a problem.

[Condunum]

If you legalize in America, the Cartel's main profit source will shrink enough that they will have about the same power that bootleggers have.

They tried that in Amsterdam, it didnt work well for them.

What cartels are in Amsterdam?

[Seperates]

Then don't stand near them when they are smoking. Most smokers I know TRY to stay away from non-smokers... going so far as to stand outside in below-zero temperatures so that they can get their nicotine fix.

Yeah, I'll just never go home.
Or to my dorm room.
Or my workplace.
Or the park.
Or my school.

Yeah. That will work.
Not to mention its effects on medical care and insurance.

(This is also a topic for another thread though...)

Well, I'm sorry to hear that. Here it's illegal in public places, and generally considered common curtesy to do so outside if in a private residence.

And it's nowhere near the cost of obesity and heart problems that are a much larger (lol I'm punny) problem for our mediical care and insurance policies. So we might as well ban fatty foods while we're at it.

But you're right... jumping ship in 5... 4... 3... 2... 1... Boop! (boop? Wtf is a boop?)

[IshCong]

Yeah, I'll just never go home.
Or to my dorm room.
Or my workplace.
Or the park.
Or my school.

Yeah. That will work.
Not to mention its effects on medical care and insurance.

(This is also a topic for another thread though...)

Well, I'm sorry to hear that. Here it's illegal in public places, and generally considered common curtesy to do so outside if in a private residence.

And it's nowhere near the cost of obesity and heart problems that are a much larger (lol I'm punny) problem for our mediical care and insurance policies. So we might as well ban fatty foods while we're at it.

It causes some of those heart problems, for starters.
For another, not everyone is so courteous, and even outside, people can still wind up inhaling it. Especially if you have a large group, in a localized area. Which is common.

Further regulations on the content of some foods, so they aren't so egregiously and ridiculously unhealthy, I could support. Along with a whole slew of other efforts to reduce obesity and smoking.

EDIT: Oops, missed the last part.

[Seperates]

Well, I'm sorry to hear that. Here it's illegal in public places, and generally considered common curtesy to do so outside if in a private residence.

And it's nowhere near the cost of obesity and heart problems that are a much larger (lol I'm punny) problem for our mediical care and insurance policies. So we might as well ban fatty foods while we're at it.

It causes some of those heart problems, for starters.
For another, not everyone is so courteous, and even outside, people can still wind up inhaling it. Especially if you have a large group, in a localized area. Which is common.

Further regulations on the content of some foods, so they aren't so egregiously and ridiculously unhealthy, I could support. Along with a whole slew of other efforts to reduce obesity and smoking.

EDIT: Oops, missed the last part.

While I would support that... I don't support being a moralistic bastard, so no. ( I was linking obesity with heart problems anyways... sooo)

[IshCong]

It causes some of those heart problems, for starters.
For another, not everyone is so courteous, and even outside, people can still wind up inhaling it. Especially if you have a large group, in a localized area. Which is common.

Further regulations on the content of some foods, so they aren't so egregiously and ridiculously unhealthy, I could support. Along with a whole slew of other efforts to reduce obesity and smoking.

EDIT: Oops, missed the last part.

While I would support that... I don't support being a moralistic bastard, so no.

Eh. *shrugs* Morality is subjective anyway.

[Seperates]

While I would support that... I don't support being a moralistic bastard, so no.

Eh. *shrugs* Morality is subjective anyway.

Exactly. So you shouldn't try to shove your's down somebody else's throat via legal means. Because that's being a moralistic bastard. Dissapproving of it publically, or even judging people is fine. But criminalizing things just because they don't agree with what your stance on life is, to me, being a moralistic bastard.

[IshCong]

Eh. *shrugs* Morality is subjective anyway.

Exactly. So you shouldn't try to shove your's down somebody else's throat via legal means. Because that's being a moralistic bastard. Dissapproving of it publically, or even judging people is fine. But criminalizing things just because they don't agree with what your stance on life is, to me, being a moralistic bastard.

Well, I oppose smoking because I feel it causes more objective harm than objective good. Morally speaking, I'm apathetic, because the action is not taken to cause harm, nor to cause good, so it is morally neutral.

But regardless, we're all moralistic bastards, because everything comes down to some sort of moral judgement, including the moral judgement that it is good to help society, and what that means. So it's irrelevant.

[The Finlandia Peoples]

The auto bailout was a success???? Have u ever been in Detroit, mind you its gotten a lil better but still parts of it r ghost towns....as for syria, the only reason we r not in, is because Syria and Russia r very great allies. if we were to get involved in Syria, Russia would counteract, either directly or indirectly... I will say he did get us out of Iraq, I hope not too soon....

1. Detroit has been suffering since the early 80s. Coincidentally, this is when GM started moving its factories to Mexico(while retaining its same generous tax breaks,) thanks to Reagan's union busting and the administration just generally being in bed with corporations on a level completely unseen before.

2. We aren't involved in Syria because we haven't received a UN Mandate. Al-Assad has tentatively accepted a ceasefire, and there are only a few real hotspots left. The UN is working with the military to try and stop the fighting completely as we speak.

3. Too soon? We shouldn't have been involved to begin with. Iraq was a fucking disaster and we've accomplished nothing save for pissing away ~$3 trillion and killing hundreds of thousands of people.

Hey I never said getting involved in Iraq was a good idea, but suddenly pulling can't be good for national security....

[IshCong]

The auto bailout was a success???? Have u ever been in Detroit, mind you its gotten a lil better but still parts of it r ghost towns....as for syria, the only reason we r not in, is because Syria and Russia r very great allies. if we were to get involved in Syria, Russia would counteract, either directly or indirectly... I will say he did get us out of Iraq, I hope not too soon....

1. Detroit has been suffering since the early 80s. Coincidentally, this is when GM started moving its factories to Mexico(while retaining its same generous tax breaks,) thanks to Reagan's union busting and the administration just generally being in bed with corporations on a level completely unseen before.

Wait, you are saying that removing US unions caused GM to move to Mexico?
Elaborate please?

[Tmutarakhan]

I love it that Romney can't even get ahead of "None of the above"

[Seperates]

Exactly. So you shouldn't try to shove your's down somebody else's throat via legal means. Because that's being a moralistic bastard. Dissapproving of it publically, or even judging people is fine. But criminalizing things just because they don't agree with what your stance on life is, to me, being a moralistic bastard.

Well, I oppose smoking because I feel it causes more objective harm than objective good. Morally speaking, I'm apathetic, because the action is not taken to cause harm, nor to cause good, so it is morally neutral.

But regardless, we're all moralistic bastards, because everything comes down to some sort of moral judgement, including the moral judgement that it is good to help society, and what that means. So it's irrelevant.

Unless you are making them jump through hoops to recieve the aid, then you aren't being a moralistic bastard. Again, judging is fine. Forcing is not.