Tobacco expected to kill 1 billion this century

[Kandahar]

Well, guess what, Kandahar? That's what I do. :roll:

Fair enough, but why condemn others who make different choices?

 

[Binary_Digit]

Well, I am 21, and it's legal for me to drink. Why am I not allowed to walk around a city or town drinking alcohol? That's against the law.

I thought he was talking about a smoking ban inside people's own condos, not around town. Would you like being told that you can't drink in your own home?

 

[Ikari]

Well, I am 21, and it's legal for me to drink. Why am I not allowed to walk around a city or town drinking alcohol? That's against the law.

Arbitrary, selectively enforced laws so that the police may stop people whom they don't like for reasons they can make up on the spot.

 

[aps]

I thought he was talking about a smoking ban inside people's own condos, not around town. Would you like being told that you can't drink in your own home?

Sorry, bad comparison.

 

[Caine]

Arbitrary, selectively enforced laws so that the police may stop people whom they don't like for reasons they can make up on the spot.

Yes, because the police are the ones who write the laws originally.
:roll:

You police hating people make me puke.

 

[GottaHurt]

Oh I can't wait for the day that I can walk down the street naked, drinking from a bottle of vodka, smoking a joint, and then pi$$ing on the leg of a breast feeding liberal, without fear of any stigma or legal recourse.

 

[WI Crippler]

Yes, because the police are the ones who write the laws originally.
:roll:

You police hating people make me puke.

Maybe cops should start enforcing every little illegal thing they see happen, and then people will probably realize the long leash the police give the public.

 

[WI Crippler]

Oh I can't wait for the day that I can walk down the street naked, drinking from a bottle of vodka, smoking a joint, and then pi$$ing on the leg of a breast feeding liberal, without fear of any stigma or legal recourse.

:rofl

Utopia

 

[Ikari]

Yes, because the police are the ones who write the laws originally.
:roll:

You police hating people make me puke.

Please puke in the corner, that constitutes a health risk and you can be fined.

The authority has been given quite a bit of power and digressions and they use it at their whim. If they don't like the cut of one's jib, there is certainly some law they are "breaking" and can be arrested for. Sorry if reality makes you puke, but it's one of the reasons why we need to limit and constrain the government and all of its arms.

 

[Ikari]

Maybe cops should start enforcing every little illegal thing they see happen, and then people will probably realize the long leash the police give the public.

It's not quite how long a leash the police give us (first of HA! second off, we give the police everything they have), but it would demonstrate that there are far too many laws on the books and many of them should be taken off.

 

[americanwoman]

Hey, marijuana never killed 1 billion people :devil: Legalize the good smoke- a contact high is better for your health than second hand smoke.

 

[WI Crippler]

It's not quite how long a leash the police give us (first of HA! second off, we give the police everything they have), but it would demonstrate that there are far too many laws on the books and many of them should be taken off.

I agree about there being too many laws. But the fact that not all of these laws are being vigorously enforced, shows that the police show leineancy when its not really in their job description to do so. You people act like we live in a police state, when we are very far from any such thing.

 

[Caine]

Please puke in the corner, that constitutes a health risk and you can be fined.

The authority has been given quite a bit of power and digressions and they use it at their whim. If they don't like the cut of one's jib, there is certainly some law they are "breaking" and can be arrested for. Sorry if reality makes you puke, but it's one of the reasons why we need to limit and constrain the government and all of its arms.

And who is to know more about the "reality" of what police do.
You paranoid schizophrenic government haters, or an actual police officer with integrity who has been quite ****ing honest about police practices on this forum.

Again, your assumptions are, and always have been, ridiculous in nature with little shred of proof except for a few select "special" circumstances.

 

[Ikari]

I agree about there being too many laws. But the fact that not all of these laws are being vigorously enforced, shows that the police show leineancy when its not really in their job description to do so. You people act like we live in a police state, when we are very far from any such thing.

But that's the exact problem. It isn't that the police show "leniency" towards most of us, it's that the law becomes selectively enforced. If something is a law, it should be just and it should be enforced across the board. Murder is illegal, for the most part all homicide cases are investigate by the police. Murder being illegal is a just law and is equally enforced. If something isn't equally enforced, that is a good hint that it isn't a just law. Public intoxication (for example) is a selectively enforced law. For the most part it's not going to be a problem, but if a cop just doesn't like the way you look you're going to get nailed. Why should a kid wearing fraternity letters (again this is all an example) spend the night in jail and get fined whereas some dude in a suit walks home from the bar just fine because the enforcement officer maybe was sick of being called out to fraternity houses for noise complaints? Laws should be made for good reason, and if they are then they need to be enforced equally across the board. I have a feeling that if everyone was harassed for all the laws that are on the books, we would have a lot less laws and be left with the more just lot.

Selectively enforced laws lead to certain members of society being singled out, it's all or nothing. The police are charged with upholding the law, they don't get to choose which laws they uphold; I pay them to uphold them all. We would see a markedly different set of laws if all laws were enforced equally across the board, and it would probably be for the best if we did just that.

 

[Ikari]

And who is to know more about the "reality" of what police do.
You paranoid schizophrenic government haters, or an actual police officer with integrity who has been quite ****ing honest about police practices on this forum.

Again, your assumptions are, and always have been, ridiculous in nature with little shred of proof except for a few select "special" circumstances.

Having fun with hyperbole I see. You don't have to go off the deep end just because I question authority. There are a lot of good, honest police officers; that doesn't mean I'm going to trust you all. There are also a good number of corrupt, law breaking police officers; I can't tell which is which just by looking at you. It's foolish to blindly trust the authority, it was never meant to be trusted. We the people give certain privilege and duty to the government to accomplish certain deeds. But because they are then granted power, they must be watched so that they don't abuse it and those whom do abuse it must be punished.

But if going on a crazy bender is gonna make you feel better, more power to you.

 

[WI Crippler]

But that's the exact problem. It isn't that the police show "leniency" towards most of us, it's that the law becomes selectively enforced. If something is a law, it should be just and it should be enforced across the board. Murder is illegal, for the most part all homicide cases are investigate by the police. Murder being illegal is a just law and is equally enforced. If something isn't equally enforced, that is a good hint that it isn't a just law. Public intoxication (for example) is a selectively enforced law. For the most part it's not going to be a problem, but if a cop just doesn't like the way you look you're going to get nailed. Why should a kid wearing fraternity letters (again this is all an example) spend the night in jail and get fined whereas some dude in a suit walks home from the bar just fine because the enforcement officer maybe was sick of being called out to fraternity houses for noise complaints? Laws should be made for good reason, and if they are then they need to be enforced equally across the board. I have a feeling that if everyone was harassed for all the laws that are on the books, we would have a lot less laws and be left with the more just lot.

Selectively enforced laws lead to certain members of society being singled out, it's all or nothing. The police are charged with upholding the law, they don't get to choose which laws they uphold; I pay them to uphold them all. We would see a markedly different set of laws if all laws were enforced equally across the board, and it would probably be for the best if we did just that.

Problem being that if cops enforced all the laws, you libertarians would be screaming about the facist police state we live in(some of you are close enough already). There is no real utopian solution that can be created in reality, and I'd feel better about having a policeman use their own discretion as to what is ridiculous and what needs enforcement based on the situation, rather than a written in stone law. I'd rather trust the guy on the scene instead of a book, even if its to my disadvantage. If need be, thats why we have a judicial system that can correct errors by our police force.

 

[GottaHurt]

Sweet, the "Tobacco expected to kill 1 billion this century" thread has now morphed into the "Police and their discretionary law enforcement practices" thread.

Perhaps we can get some breast feeding half nude 10 year old belly dancers who hate Bush weaved in here, and we'll all be groovin'...

 

[Ikari]

Problem being that if cops enforced all the laws, you libertarians would be screaming about the facist police state we live in(some of you are close enough already).

Oh, if all the laws were enforced equally across the board, it would be more than we libertarians screaming about the fascist police state.

There is no real utopian solution that can be created in reality, and I'd feel better about having a policeman use their own discretion as to what is ridiculous and what needs enforcement based on the situation, rather than a written in stone law. I'd rather trust the guy on the scene instead of a book, even if its to my disadvantage. If need be, thats why we have a judicial system that can correct errors by our police force.

There is no utopia, that's why there is government. If utopia existed, we could live in anarchy; but anarchy doesn't work in reality so to ensure the rights of the individual are guaranteed and freely exercised, government was created. We have police because there are a set of just laws which must be enforced, we have the judges and juries to make sure the laws are just and people should be punished (that's why it's a jury of peers, laws may be written but it is up to your peers to decide if you did anything wrong or not, all power and authority lies within the people). Cops enforce the written laws, the courts are where the discretion lies (which is why automatic punishments for certain crimes is a bad idea). The cops don't get to choose which laws are enforced, your peers decide which ones are just.

Like I said, if we enforced all the laws equally we would end up with a lot less. Mostly because there would be a heck of a lot more people than just we libertarians screaming about the coming police state. It would make more people sit up and pay attention as to what is going down and what laws the government is making and how the police community is enforcing them.

 

[Psychoclown]

I agree that certain laws beg for police discretion. Does anyone really want cops to write a ticket for every busted tail light they see? However there are certainly laws on the books that serve no real purpose (like public drunkeness) and are really open to abuse and selected enforcement. I'm not saying all cops use these laws in an abusive or prejudicial manner, but these laws certainly make that an easy option for cops who are inclined to do so.

 

[ARealConservative]

As an aside, about the same number of people will die this century with or without tobacco being used.

 

[Psychoclown]

Like I said, if we enforced all the laws equally we would end up with a lot less. Mostly because there would be a heck of a lot more people than just we libertarians screaming about the coming police state. It would make more people sit up and pay attention as to what is going down and what laws the government is making and how the police community is enforcing them.

Talk like this is why people don't take libertarians seriously. There are laws I object to and even Supreme Court rulings I feel violate what our Constitution says, but to claim that we are moving towards anything resembles an actual police state is ridiculous and removes any credibility the speaker may have.

 

[Ikari]

There was a sentence before that part and it was a response to a comment you know. I am not saying the US is a police state (though we have many a scary law), I'm saying that if we enforced all the laws on the books that it would be more than we libertarians screaming about the police state. Perchance that was bad wording, I was just going off of the post I was responding to which used that terminology.

The point is that if all the laws on the books were enforced equally across the board, we would have a lot less laws on the books because many of those laws are unjust, selectively enforced laws that if applied to the whole would upset the people to the point of ensuring the removal of those laws.

 

[WI Crippler]

Oh, if all the laws were enforced equally across the board, it would be more than we libertarians screaming about the fascist police state.



There is no utopia, that's why there is government. If utopia existed, we could live in anarchy; but anarchy doesn't work in reality so to ensure the rights of the individual are guaranteed and freely exercised, government was created. We have police because there are a set of just laws which must be enforced, we have the judges and juries to make sure the laws are just and people should be punished (that's why it's a jury of peers, laws may be written but it is up to your peers to decide if you did anything wrong or not, all power and authority lies within the people). Cops enforce the written laws, the courts are where the discretion lies (which is why automatic punishments for certain crimes is a bad idea). The cops don't get to choose which laws are enforced, your peers decide which ones are just.

Like I said, if we enforced all the laws equally we would end up with a lot less. Mostly because there would be a heck of a lot more people than just we libertarians screaming about the coming police state. It would make more people sit up and pay attention as to what is going down and what laws the government is making and how the police community is enforcing them.

Or we would end up with overfilled prisons (which we already have) and states taking more taxes to build more prisons because cops are just doing their job the way the law says to. And people won't do **** because they are too lazy to take up or research anything and they will just grumble about it under their breath and keep on pushing on. Thats the thing most people on these boards don't realize. Alot of America may care about politics, but most of it doesn't care to do anything about it but bitch about it at home. You libertarians think their is this mass movement out there waiting for you, but there isn't yet. It only exists on college campuses and internet forums. It may happen one day, but that day is far away and not this election cycle.

 

[Ikari]

Or we would end up with overfilled prisons (which we already have) and states taking more taxes to build more prisons because cops are just doing their job the way the law says to. And people won't do **** because they are too lazy to take up or research anything and they will just grumble about it under their breath and keep on pushing on. Thats the thing most people on these boards don't realize. Alot of America may care about politics, but most of it doesn't care to do anything about it but bitch about it at home. You libertarians think their is this mass movement out there waiting for you, but there isn't yet. It only exists on college campuses and internet forums. It may happen one day, but that day is far away and not this election cycle.

Well on that point you are correct. The unfortunate situation is that if we were ever to actually hit police state, that a police state is a stable equilibrium which can't be easily broken from. It is also true that people are lazy and don't quite want to accept their duties and responsibilities as freemen. We may not get things this election, but I ain't gonna give up trying; freedom and liberty are always worth fighting for. One day we will awaken the people, I hope by that point it isn't too late; but I have faith in the American people that when push comes to shove enough will stand up for freedom.

 

[Psychoclown]

There was a sentence before that part and it was a response to a comment you know. I am not saying the US is a police state (though we have many a scary law), I'm saying that if we enforced all the laws on the books that it would be more than we libertarians screaming about the police state. Perchance that was bad wording, I was just going off of the post I was responding to which used that terminology.

The point is that if all the laws on the books were enforced equally across the board, we would have a lot less laws on the books because many of those laws are unjust, selectively enforced laws that if applied to the whole would upset the people to the point of ensuring the removal of those laws.

I see what you were trying to say, but please be careful. Too many libertarians honestly believe we live in or are moving towards a police state and these chicken littles hurt the credibility of anyone who claims to be a libertarian. I think its important for moderate libertarians to call out the extremists when they say/post such ridiculous claims.

And I agree in general that most laws should be uniformly enforced and not open to discretion. Discretion opens the door for favoritism, corruption, profiling, and prejudice. However, do you really want everyone who's going one mile over the speed limit to get a ticket? Speed limits are a necessary law (though I'd argue that ours are often set too low and the motivation is often revenue for the state or municipality in question) but do we really want everyone who violates them to be in court? Same for violations like having a busted tail light. For most people, a simple warning is enough to make sure they get it fixed. So why require a cop to ticket everyone who has a light out?