It's called I don't think my personal views should have any impact whatsoever on the laws in our country. I would never use the force of law to stop anyone from doing it, but I do believe it's far more intelligent to simply save your money than blow it all on the extremely minute off chance you could win.
Thank you. That's the intelligent retort I was looking for. Pretty reasonable argument, though I disagree. Let's talk about that. Drug use in and of itself doesn't affect others, that's why it shouldn't be illegal. It's what people choose to do while on them that matters. Kind of like with alcohol. Choosing to drink and drive is very much illegal and should be. We don't criminalize alcohol because it lowers your inhibitions and often makes one think they are ok to drive when they aren't. This is because not all who drink, drink and drive. Despite a strong correlation between the two, we hold people accountable for the actions they actually do rather than doing things that
may lead to those actions. Saying drugs should be illegal because people use who them may do this or may do that as a result is called a slippery slope logical fallacy and has no place in our criminal justice system.
Fine, I concede that one. Again, thank you for the intelligent retort. This is how debates work. And as you see I have not yet left, and have maintained civility with you. Hopefully this is a start to a new relationship with each other on this forum.
The sheer amount of laws in this country is an objective fact. There are about 20,000 laws just governing the use and ownership of guns. That's only one tiny little area of legislative oversight. 20,000 laws. Can you name these laws off the top of your head? I know I wouldn't have the time to type them out even if I used google as a reference. And that's just for guns. The Internal Revenue Code contains more than 3.4 million words, coming up to roughly 7,500 pages. In a typical year, Congress passes at least 125 new laws. In 10 years this adds up to roughly a thousand laws. There's little benign laws like not sharing your netflix password. And we are just speaking federally here, we have not yet touched on state and local laws. There is no way anybody can remember all these laws and obey them to the letter. As a result, people who intend to follow the law still end up breaking them. This is a problem. I would like to hear your justification for this.
http://www.kowal.com/?q=How-Many-Federal-Laws-Are-There?
Yes, common sense. Something actually all too uncommon these days. We have so many laws there's actually no solid number of how many there are. Is it not common sense to assume it's fucking difficult to obey the law when you don't know how many there are, much less what they are?
If she took 10 years to get from her bedroom to the bathroom, say like 50 feet, could anybody ever consider that speedy? There is a point where something usually pretty subjective becomes so ridiculous it's no longer a subjective issue. If I were bitching about a few weeks or even like two or three months, I would concede here. But waiting years in jail for a trial is so ridiculous it's no longer subjectively slow but slow without a doubt in the world.
I only said there are people sitting in jail unconvicted. You are the one that said it is justified to keep them there because "alot of people in jail say they're innocent when they're not, should we just let them go?" I'm the one that believes, yes, we should. Until we can prove they are guilty.
