Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Well you see, I would say that making laws against drugs is unconstitutional.
How about murder?
Murder would violate the rights of the person being murdered. The sale or use of drugs does not violate anybody's rights.
using that model...Well you see, I would say that making laws against drugs is unconstitutional.
what about highly explosive unstable materials? like.......meth. those which can blow up an entire apartment building or whose gas can kill a three year old child that lives on the floor above you, simply because you are exercising your "right" to own it?
What about operating gigantic machines that move at high speeds that could potentially kill the three year old going in the opposite direction in their own gigantic machine, with only a little yellow line painted on the ground to separate you? Perhaps we should outlaw vehicles and bring back the horse and buggies.
There are laws that restrict it's use...just like drugs.
I supposed you find Anne "Adam's Apple" Coulter a babe, too....
How about murder?
Murder would violate the rights of the person being murdered. The sale or use of drugs does not violate anybody's rights.
Really? The sale or use of drugs that are dangerous, addictive, and potentially deadly does not violate that unalienable right that attach to the murder victim? Why isn't the drug user a victim? Why is what Bernie Madoff did illegal? The drug user and the Madoff victim both bought their product willingly. Why is one a victim and one not?
using that model...what about highly explosive unstable materials? like.......meth. those which can blow up an entire apartment building or whose gas can kill a three year old child that lives on the floor above you, simply because you are exercising your "right" to own it?
What about operating gigantic machines that move at high speeds that could potentially kill the three year old going in the opposite direction in their own gigantic machine, with only a little yellow line painted on the ground to separate you? Perhaps we should outlaw vehicles and bring back the horse and buggies.
I take it you are in favor of americans having the right to manufacture their own nuclear weapons?
using that model...What about operating gigantic machines that move at high speeds that could potentially kill the three year old going in the opposite direction in their own gigantic machine, with only a little yellow line painted on the ground to separate you? Perhaps we should outlaw vehicles and bring back the horse and buggies.
I take it you are in favor of americans having the right to manufacture their own nuclear weapons?
I don't condone violence. I would, however, certainly be in favor of private businesses creating nuclear energy if they can do so profitably.
Murder would violate the rights of the person being murdered. The sale or use of drugs does not violate anybody's rights.
Really? The sale or use of drugs that are dangerous, addictive, and potentially deadly does not violate that unalienable right that attach to the murder victim? Why isn't the drug user a victim? Why is what Bernie Madoff did illegal? The drug user and the Madoff victim both bought their product willingly. Why is one a victim and one not?
Madoff committed fraud against his victims.
Drug users know what they're getting into when they willingly decide to take drugs.
using that model...
I take it you are in favor of americans having the right to manufacture their own nuclear weapons?
I don't condone violence. I would, however, certainly be in favor of private businesses creating nuclear energy if they can do so profitably.
should it be legal for individuals or businesses to manufacture nukes? it's the same argument you're making for meth.
I don't condone violence. I would, however, certainly be in favor of private businesses creating nuclear energy if they can do so profitably.
should it be legal for individuals or businesses to manufacture nukes? it's the same argument you're making for meth.
Sure. If you can setup a profitable business selling nuclear weapons in the private sector go ahead.
Really? The sale or use of drugs that are dangerous, addictive, and potentially deadly does not violate that unalienable right that attach to the murder victim? Why isn't the drug user a victim? Why is what Bernie Madoff did illegal? The drug user and the Madoff victim both bought their product willingly. Why is one a victim and one not?
Madoff committed fraud against his victims.
Drug users know what they're getting into when they willingly decide to take drugs.
Yes he did, but drug dealers perpetrate a fraud against their victims as well.
My overall point is that the High Court gets to decide what is and what isn't Constitutional. If Congress passes a law and SCOTUS doesn't touch it, then it is law. Congress gets powers that are not enumerated by the Constitution as well. The 9th amendment protects all people. That includes, a body of people that represent more people.
should it be legal for individuals or businesses to manufacture nukes? it's the same argument you're making for meth.
Sure. If you can setup a profitable business selling nuclear weapons in the private sector go ahead.
See, that is just absurd.
should it be legal for individuals or businesses to manufacture nukes? it's the same argument you're making for meth.
Sure. If you can setup a profitable business selling nuclear weapons in the private sector go ahead.
See, that is just absurd.
Madoff committed fraud against his victims.
Drug users know what they're getting into when they willingly decide to take drugs.
Yes he did, but drug dealers perpetrate a fraud against their victims as well.
My overall point is that the High Court gets to decide what is and what isn't Constitutional. If Congress passes a law and SCOTUS doesn't touch it, then it is law. Congress gets powers that are not enumerated by the Constitution as well. The 9th amendment protects all people. That includes, a body of people that represent more people.
Everyone knows drugs are bad for them. Not everyone has the wonderful insight into economics and finance to see that Madoff's system was unstable, not that that would have saved them since it was well hidden even from those who were supposed to be monitoring that sort of activity.
The High Court gave itself that power. That's quite a strange interpretation of the 9th Amendment, and certainly not in the plain language present in the 9th Amendment itself. The 9th protects the rights of all people, and that certainly includes the members of Congress, but it doesn't give them the right to do whatever they want as members of Congress. That's ridiculous.
Sure. If you can setup a profitable business selling nuclear weapons in the private sector go ahead.
See, that is just absurd.
Most hypotheticals are.
Yes he did, but drug dealers perpetrate a fraud against their victims as well.
My overall point is that the High Court gets to decide what is and what isn't Constitutional. If Congress passes a law and SCOTUS doesn't touch it, then it is law. Congress gets powers that are not enumerated by the Constitution as well. The 9th amendment protects all people. That includes, a body of people that represent more people.
Everyone knows drugs are bad for them. Not everyone has the wonderful insight into economics and finance to see that Madoff's system was unstable, not that that would have saved them since it was well hidden even from those who were supposed to be monitoring that sort of activity.
The High Court gave itself that power. That's quite a strange interpretation of the 9th Amendment, and certainly not in the plain language present in the 9th Amendment itself. The 9th protects the rights of all people, and that certainly includes the members of Congress, but it doesn't give them the right to do whatever they want as members of Congress. That's ridiculous.
You assume that everyone knows that drugs are bad for them.
Everyone knows drugs are bad for them. Not everyone has the wonderful insight into economics and finance to see that Madoff's system was unstable, not that that would have saved them since it was well hidden even from those who were supposed to be monitoring that sort of activity.
The High Court gave itself that power. That's quite a strange interpretation of the 9th Amendment, and certainly not in the plain language present in the 9th Amendment itself. The 9th protects the rights of all people, and that certainly includes the members of Congress, but it doesn't give them the right to do whatever they want as members of Congress. That's ridiculous.
You assume that everyone knows that drugs are bad for them.
I also assume that anyone who gets behind the wheel knows they could potentially die a horrible death. Regardless of whether this assumption is right or wrong, freedom is preferable to having the government babysit everything we do.
Everyone knows drugs are bad for them. Not everyone has the wonderful insight into economics and finance to see that Madoff's system was unstable, not that that would have saved them since it was well hidden even from those who were supposed to be monitoring that sort of activity.
The High Court gave itself that power. That's quite a strange interpretation of the 9th Amendment, and certainly not in the plain language present in the 9th Amendment itself. The 9th protects the rights of all people, and that certainly includes the members of Congress, but it doesn't give them the right to do whatever they want as members of Congress. That's ridiculous.
You assume that everyone knows that drugs are bad for them.
I also assume that anyone who gets behind the wheel knows they could potentially die a horrible death. Regardless of whether this assumption is right or wrong, freedom is preferable to having the government babysit everything we do.
See, that is just absurd.
Most hypotheticals are.
it's the same argument you made about cars.
You assume that everyone knows that drugs are bad for them.
I also assume that anyone who gets behind the wheel knows they could potentially die a horrible death. Regardless of whether this assumption is right or wrong, freedom is preferable to having the government babysit everything we do.
so americans should be allowed to manufacture nuclear weapons, because they know the risk they are posing to themselves and everyone else, right?
