Ron Paul Supporters not welcome in Louisiana GOP

[ladajo]

expounding or ranting. Hmmm...
Yup, perspective based.

[GIThruster]

They put one of our NJ relatives away for 10 or 15 years. The whole family changed its mind (those who hadn't already) about prohibition after that.

That happens with nearly all crime. I've read several studies over the years documenting the odd phenomenon that nearly all inmates claim to be innocent and out of those who can't because the evidence is so obvious, they always have an argument that what they were doing was not their fault or should not be a crime.

Doesn't change the facts about what is criminal activity.

Decades ago, a close friend's father was found guilty of stealing from the public school district he was supervisor for and spending the money on gambling. He got off with a wrist slap. Then he was warned by his own brother to stop stealing from their mother and aunt, and as he continued on, his brother pressed charges and he was found guilty. Since the prisons are so overcrowded, he got 2 years home confinement. His entire family maintained that he was innocent, despite he had embezzled hundreds of thousands of dollars from the estate of these two elderly women and spent it on new cars for all his family members, etc. Then he took a position as a financial advisor and was caught embezzling and gambling again. He's in prison.

His whole family maintains his innocence. What are they supposed to say, "Dad is a crook"?

I know someone else who has a relative who was accused of sex crimes against his girlfriend's 15 year old daughter. There were witnesses. On several occasions he tried to get the young girl to watch and pose for porn with her boyfriend, also 15. He was accused of rape as well. The evidence against him was so compelling he pled guilty, and yet all his family members claim he's innocent as does he.

The fact your mother changed her mind about what is criminal activity just because a family member is guilty of the same, is evidence of nothing. After all, she knows you're guilty of daily criminal activity. Doesn't matter that you claim the law is wrong. The fact is, if you break it daily, you belong in prison. That's what prisons are for.

[MSimon]

They put one of our NJ relatives away for 10 or 15 years. The whole family changed its mind (those who hadn't already) about prohibition after that.

That happens with nearly all crime. I've read several studies over the years documenting the odd phenomenon that nearly all inmates claim to be innocent and out of those who can't because the evidence is so obvious, they always have an argument that what they were doing was not their fault or should not be a crime.

Doesn't change the facts about what is criminal activity.

Decades ago, a close friend's father was found guilty of stealing from the public school district he was supervisor for and spending the money on gambling. He got off with a wrist slap. Then he was warned by his own brother to stop stealing from their mother and aunt, and as he continued on, his brother pressed charges and he was found guilty. Since the prisons are so overcrowded, he got 2 years home confinement. His entire family maintained that he was innocent, despite he had embezzled hundreds of thousands of dollars from the estate of these two elderly women and spent it on new cars for all his family members, etc. Then he took a position as a financial advisor and was caught embezzling and gambling again. He's in prison.

His whole family maintains his innocence. What are they supposed to say, "Dad is a crook"?

I know someone else who has a relative who was accused of sex crimes against his girlfriend's 15 year old daughter. There were witnesses. On several occasions he tried to get the young girl to watch and pose for porn with her boyfriend, also 15. He was accused of rape as well. The evidence against him was so compelling he pled guilty, and yet all his family members claim he's innocent as does he.

The fact your mother changed her mind about what is criminal activity just because a family member is guilty of the same, is evidence of nothing. After all, she knows you're guilty of daily criminal activity. Doesn't matter that you claim the law is wrong. The fact is, if you break it daily, you belong in prison. That's what prisons are for.

If he had hurt some one the family would have been very tough on him. No mercy.

We have a LOT of OFs in the family who experienced alcohol prohibition. My guess is the family saw the "crime" as just a repeat of what happened from 1920 to 1933.

So was drinking alcohol or selling it between 1920 and 1933 a crime? Or was government the real criminal?

Can you violate a man's rights by vote? Well sure. But after a while people don't take such violations seriously.

But it gets even better. Can you, as a practical matter outlaw a plant? It is a fools errand. Can you outlaw chemistry? And what happens - as it eventually will - when some one designs some yeast to turn out THC or cocaine or opium. Just add sugar and water and possibly a few nutrients. How will you police that? Assign watchers to every person? Essentially what Drug Prohibition requires to be even somewhat effective is a police state. Is that what you want?

I have a personal problem. I can't pee in a bottle while others watch. I have had that condition since age 5. The doctor used to send me home with a sample cup and my parents returned it after I filled it. Effectively that puts me out of the job market. I haven't held a job for 12 years because of that. Are you getting your money's worth? Prohibition has destroyed my personal economics. So what did I do in response? Well I'm effectively leeching off you. Are you getting your money's worth?

I have tried to be useful and my freedom to promote Polywell and write has probably done some good. But was that the best use of my time? It pains me to be unable to support my kids the way I would have liked. But I'm just another bit of collateral damage.

About 3% of the population has the problem. From what I understand my condition is more severe than most. BTW I don't travel a lot because of the problem. Holding it for 16 or 20 hours is painful.

Back when I was working and started a new job it generally took me two or three weeks to become comfortable enough to use the facilities at work. But holding it for 8 or 9 hours is not too bad.

The last job I had I got let go after two weeks because of the problem. It was the last time I bothered to work. For two weeks I spent two or three hours every weekday night going to the clinic to try and meet the requirement. I drank so much water the last time I went that I was in agony. Fcuk you. If you want to screw me I'm going to leach off you. Did you get your money's worth?

And you want to tell me I should suffer because it has been declared that some plants and plant extracts have been outlawed?

Well let me tell you. I am going to put an end to prohibition. Too late to help me. But it will help others. I'm a very stubborn son of a bitch and will not give up until I succeed or die.

"You will not be able to hold a job unless you can pee in a bottle while we watch." Fcuk you.

It is the government and all those who support it in this matter who are the criminals. Every last g-dam one of you. Fcuk you.

[MSimon]

The Drug War reduced me from upper middle class ($1K to 2K a week depending to poverty - under $170 a week - not to mention the numerous times I had to move because I couldn't stretch that enough to eat, take care of my kids, and pay rent.)

Fcuk you.

And you wonder why I know so much about the subject? Well thanks to folks like you I have had a lot of time to study the matter. I'm probably one of the better amateur experts on the subject.

Fcuk you.

Yeah. Dopers are lame. So what? I would prefer working in my field to living on welfare. And thanks to your hate of lame dopers I'm out of a job.

Fcuk you.

[GIThruster]

You haven't had a job for 12 years because you can't pass a drug test. By your own admission you've been a drug abuser for a lot longer than 12 years.

The "I can't pee in a bottle" bullshit story doesn't mean anything when we all know if you could, you could not pass the drug test.

You are unemployed because you're a druggie, plain and simple; and if there were no federal prohibitions against drug use, employers would still be testing and you would still be out of a job, because using is more important to you than working.

[MSimon]

If the communist in chief promises to end prohibition I'm voting for him.

Fcuk you.

I will bring the whole shite house down if I have to to end this abomination.

Fcuk you.

[MSimon]

You haven't had a job for 12 years because you can't pass a drug test. By your own admission you've been a drug abuser for a lot longer than 12 years.

I have never been a drug abuser. But I have hung around enough of them so I can "pass."

Fcuk you.

But it pleases me extremely to be leaching off you. But you have motivated me. I haven't taken as much as I could from the "system". Honor. I have decided to change my attitude. I'm going for every last dime I can get.

Fcuk you.

[MSimon]

You have no problem with me being collateral damage. Well I'm going to do my best to return the favor.

Fcuk you.

[GIThruster]

You're not "collateral damage". You made your own choice and you're responsible for them. Blaming someone else for your misfortunes is typical druggie behavior and you'd best hope I don't suffer any misfortunes myself as that threat you just made is a serious crime the FBI would be happy to follow up on.

BTW, your relative who landed himself 10 years in prison wasn't just a user, was he? I've never heard of anyone getting such a severe sentence for using. When you say he never hurt anyone, how is it the jury of his peers apparently felt very differently?

[palladin9479]

The "I can't pee in a bottle" bullshit story doesn't mean anything when we all know if you could, you could not pass the drug test.

Your ignorant, this is real. It's not peeing in a bottle, its defecating / urinating in public places, unfamiliar places or while being watched. It's a left over instinct from the days when we ran from tigers and survival meant constantly being on alert. I know this because I had the same problem, I could never pee in the urinals and had to use the toilet with the door closed. My first piss test (Military Reception) was incredibly uncomfortable and took all day. Even now, if there is a "surprise" piss test I'm gonna be there an hour or two minimum. What I've found works is drinking a metric sh!t ton of water, a few liters at least. It makes my piss clear and I end up pissing for several minutes, but they get a full g*d darn bottle so they can STFU.

One time I had to go to a Korean hospital (base clinic didn't have the facilities I needed) due to some stomach issues. They asked me for a urine sample, three hours later still no sample. We decided to use the silver bullet to extract a sample, worst idea EVER.

[palladin9479]

I've said this in the other thread so I'll say it here.

Drug abuse is a symptom not a root problem. Making drugs illegal will not cure the affliction anymore then making coughing illegal cures a cold. Identify the root problem and treat that, the symptoms will go away naturally afterwards.

Imagine spending all that money on treatments for the root problems rather then criminalizing the symptoms. Drug abusers are self medicating plain and simple, whatever drugs their using are relieving (even if temporarily) whatever mental / emotional pain they have. Anyone self medicating is dangerous.

[GIThruster]

Oh please spare us. "Palladin"? You're portraying yourself as one of the mighty douzepers of the legendary Charlemagne? A "Holy Knight"? And you want us to take you at your word that you are all knowing and determine that drugs are all good?

Pardon me while I go off and puke in the corner.

Yeah! If you need to pee to keep your job, drink some water! Stop with the silly and stupid excuses.

Simon is out of work for 12 years because he's a druggie, just as he never finished his undergraduate degree because he is a druggie.

Despite how he may want to claim that I "hate" him, I don't. What I object to is the constant, unending deluge of the shitty posts he makes, justifying his selfish and criminal lifestyle.

Simon is no victim. He's a criminal, who sacrificed his life and that of all those around him to satisfy his drug addiction.

Doesn't take a brain surgeon to note that these pro-drug rants all come from someone who's life is in shambles because he's an addict.

So smoke some more pot, write another post. . .pretend you're an authentic when you're obviously a loser.

[palladin9479]

???

Wow, guess we opened up the sewer flood gates.

Please continue. Considering the nature of the posters on this site, making rants and vitriolic spew doesn't help your image.

[pbelter]

Wow, gentlemen, this used to be a nice forum. I am sorry to see it devolving in such a manner.

The medical condition MSimon describes is called Paruresis. It is most likely an atavistic leftover form earlier evolutionary times where one did not want to get caught peeing with a potential threat lurking around. For some people it is so severe that they cannot even pee in their own house if there are strangers present and they can hear their voices, but to some degree it is present in all males. I saw psychological test created for hiring purposes with a question if one ever had difficulty urinating in a pubic restroom. If you answered "no" you were flagged as a potential liar.

Regardless of that I haven't seen any reasonable argument on why drugs should be illegal. The prohibition causes a lot of harm here in the US and even more in Latin america where the drug lords finance their evil empires due to artificially high drug prices that can be maintained only by the drug prohibition. The the crime environment that accompanies them, destabilizes and significantly slows Latin american countries in their economic development and costs tens of thousands of lives every year, while keeps millions in poverty.

Now weigh that against the government wish to coerce free adults to prevent them from harming themselves against their own free will.

On top of that take into consideration that is has been tried before on a different chemical compound and led to such rise in its consumption and crime that it had to be abandoned. Yes, I am talking about the Prohibition.

This is really about thousands years old war of the civilizations and their worldviews. In the East the Persians build a magnificent empire but one based on slavery and coercion. In the west the Greeks believed that every man should be able to govern himself. For a period of time that idea prevailed but it was long gone by the time of the Byzantium that had a strict centralized government control. For a time Europe was the land of free with an English saying "My home is my castle". But those times are gone now freedom had to flee westward again and it is under siege here now.

We better get the Polywell working so we can build those darn spaceships and get out of here while we still can...

[pbelter]

If the communist in chief promises to end prohibition I'm voting for him.

Beware what you wish for. They just might, but being who they are they will make sure by the time they are done there are no freedoms left, or at least none that count. Abortion was illegal in Nazi Germany... unless you were a Jew. Then it was legal.

There are several freedoms they haven't encroached upon yet. The first that comes to my mind is freedom of travel. It is easy to target because it is not explicitly guaranteed by the Constitution. It is also a pre-requisite to a somewhat working socialist state. The reason Cubans come to US on rafts is not because boat or plane tickets are too expensive but because it is illegal to leave the country, otherwise the whole system would crash as everybody leaves.

You start by setting a precedent that nobody cares much about.

Recently the US Senate passed the bill S.1813 "To reauthorize Federal-aid highway and highway safety construction programs, and for other purposes." Buried within it is a provision that would deny a passport to any US citizen that owes taxes. How appropriate, that is ended in a bill that is about travel and transportation. When it passes, the precedent would be set that the government has the right to limit one's travel. If that is established, then people crossing state borders carry goods with them, such as clothes, and that affects the interstate-trade, doesn't it. We are far far away from that but here is no way the communist in chief gets my vote.