A 7-year-old told her bus driver she couldn’t wake her parents. Police found them dead at home.

[Disir]

Dealing needs to be considered murder.

And if those "parents" deaths had come about because they drove a vehicle into a tree, shall we also charge the used car salesman with murder?

Did you really?

Sorry, did I really what?

Did you really just make that comparison?

 

[eflatminor]

Dealing needs to be considered murder.

And if those "parents" deaths had come about because they drove a vehicle into a tree, shall we also charge the used car salesman with murder?

Did you really?

Sorry, did I really what?

Did you really just make that comparison?

If you have a point, state it clearly man. Do you think we should treat adults engaged in consensual activity the same as someone that murders another person? Life in prison, the death penalty, etc., all on the table for a person that provided a product that another adult asked and paid for.

I say those parents made their own bed by purchasing and using a dangerous drug. I do not support equivocating the selling of that drug with murdering another person.

If you do, the yes, I've made that comparison. FAR more people die in automobile accidents than drug overdoses.

The comparison makes clear how monumentally stupid it is to suggest an adult that never hurt nor took from another should face murder charges.

Whatever your position, stop being childish and state it.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

Sometimes restrictions of accountability help people make prudent choices.

I'm sorry but I don't think "restrictions of accountability" makes any sense in or out of context.

So you don't believe drunk driving laws are an effective deterrent?

Drunk driving laws haven't stopped drunk drivers. According to gun nuts, no law is effective unless it's 100% effective.

You mean drunk drivers who are arrested and incarcerated still drive drunk while they're in jail? How do they do that?

Yet there are still more drunk drivers.

Fewer than there would be.

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

These people didn't die of a pot overdose. Nobody does. And I'm okay with recreational drug use if children aren't involved and the drug is not known to make people excessively violent. It doesn't mean it's good; but govt. needs to protect freedom, not restrict it.

Then heroin is just perfect. Rather than call it an overdose epidemic, call it a breakout of freedom.

Oh, well why don't we just enslave everyone and make sure they can never make a "bad choice" ever again. After all, it's for their own good.

Sometimes restrictions of accountability help people make prudent choices.

I'm sorry but I don't think "restrictions of accountability" makes any sense in or out of context.

So you don't believe drunk driving laws are an effective deterrent?

Did I say that? And what's the relevance?

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

Then heroin is just perfect. Rather than call it an overdose epidemic, call it a breakout of freedom.

Oh, well why don't we just enslave everyone and make sure they can never make a "bad choice" ever again. After all, it's for their own good.

Sometimes restrictions of accountability help people make prudent choices.

I'm sorry but I don't think "restrictions of accountability" makes any sense in or out of context.

So you don't believe drunk driving laws are an effective deterrent?

Did I say that? And what's the relevance?

I was providing an example of restrictions of accountability. You get drunk, your driving is restricted. Same concept for all drugs. Restricting behavior choices while intoxicated.

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

Oh, well why don't we just enslave everyone and make sure they can never make a "bad choice" ever again. After all, it's for their own good.

Sometimes restrictions of accountability help people make prudent choices.

I'm sorry but I don't think "restrictions of accountability" makes any sense in or out of context.

So you don't believe drunk driving laws are an effective deterrent?

Did I say that? And what's the relevance?

I was providing an example of restrictions of accountability. You get drunk, your driving is restricted. Same concept for all drugs. Restricting behavior choices while intoxicated.

I don't know why you call it restrictions of accountability. The term sucks. People are accountable one way or another. And my point is not that any one should be allowed to be wreckless with another person's life, so you're example is null and void.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

Sometimes restrictions of accountability help people make prudent choices.

I'm sorry but I don't think "restrictions of accountability" makes any sense in or out of context.

So you don't believe drunk driving laws are an effective deterrent?

Did I say that? And what's the relevance?

I was providing an example of restrictions of accountability. You get drunk, your driving is restricted. Same concept for all drugs. Restricting behavior choices while intoxicated.

I don't know why you call it restrictions of accountability. The term sucks. People are accountable one way or another. And my point is not that any one should be allowed to be wreckless with another person's life, so you're example is null and void.

But you encourage free will where drug use is involved. The paradox is that the resulting altered state affects that free will. So restrictions to hold people accountable for resulting behavior need to be applied as a preventive measure. It can't be as libertarian as imagined.

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

I'm sorry but I don't think "restrictions of accountability" makes any sense in or out of context.

So you don't believe drunk driving laws are an effective deterrent?

Did I say that? And what's the relevance?

I was providing an example of restrictions of accountability. You get drunk, your driving is restricted. Same concept for all drugs. Restricting behavior choices while intoxicated.

I don't know why you call it restrictions of accountability. The term sucks. People are accountable one way or another. And my point is not that any one should be allowed to be wreckless with another person's life, so you're example is null and void.

But you encourage free will where drug use is involved. The paradox is that the resulting altered state affects that free will. So restrictions to hold people accountable for resulting behavior need to be applied as a preventive measure. It can't be as libertarian as imagined.

All drugs "alter states". We'd be outlawing Tylenol if that was the threshold.

 

[JOSweetHeart]

Kinda makes you wish you could give the little girl a hug. I know it would probably help me more than her but that story hurts to even think about.

I would have a hug for every one of them kids, especially if they really did go unsupervised for more than a day. I would put whatever food they wanted right in front of them because of how starving they were too.

God bless you and them always!!!

Holly

Yet you want to cut funding for the poor.

Huh? I have no recollection of ever saying such a thing.

God bless you always!!!

Holly

 

[Disir]

Dealing needs to be considered murder.

And if those "parents" deaths had come about because they drove a vehicle into a tree, shall we also charge the used car salesman with murder?

Did you really?

Sorry, did I really what?

Did you really just make that comparison?

If you have a point, state it clearly man. Do you think we should treat adults engaged in consensual activity the same as someone that murders another person? Life in prison, the death penalty, etc., all on the table for a person that provided a product that another adult asked and paid for.

I say those parents made their own bed by purchasing and using a dangerous drug. I do not support equivocating the selling of that drug with murdering another person.

If you do, the yes, I've made that comparison. FAR more people die in automobile accidents than drug overdoses.

The comparison makes clear how monumentally stupid it is to suggest an adult that never hurt nor took from another should face murder charges.

Whatever your position, stop being childish and state it.

I stated my position in the OP. It stands.

 

[eflatminor]

And if those "parents" deaths had come about because they drove a vehicle into a tree, shall we also charge the used car salesman with murder?

Did you really?

Sorry, did I really what?

Did you really just make that comparison?

If you have a point, state it clearly man. Do you think we should treat adults engaged in consensual activity the same as someone that murders another person? Life in prison, the death penalty, etc., all on the table for a person that provided a product that another adult asked and paid for.

I say those parents made their own bed by purchasing and using a dangerous drug. I do not support equivocating the selling of that drug with murdering another person.

If you do, the yes, I've made that comparison. FAR more people die in automobile accidents than drug overdoses.

The comparison makes clear how monumentally stupid it is to suggest an adult that never hurt nor took from another should face murder charges.

Whatever your position, stop being childish and state it.

I stated my position in the OP. It stands.

Great, then by your logic, we can hold a car salesman guilty of murder if the guy who bought the car wraps himself around a tree.

That's some good thinking there pal...

Yea, pass.

 

[Disir]

Did you really?

Sorry, did I really what?

Did you really just make that comparison?

If you have a point, state it clearly man. Do you think we should treat adults engaged in consensual activity the same as someone that murders another person? Life in prison, the death penalty, etc., all on the table for a person that provided a product that another adult asked and paid for.

I say those parents made their own bed by purchasing and using a dangerous drug. I do not support equivocating the selling of that drug with murdering another person.

If you do, the yes, I've made that comparison. FAR more people die in automobile accidents than drug overdoses.

The comparison makes clear how monumentally stupid it is to suggest an adult that never hurt nor took from another should face murder charges.

Whatever your position, stop being childish and state it.

I stated my position in the OP. It stands.

Great, then by your logic, we can hold a car salesman guilty of murder if the guy who bought the car wraps himself around a tree.

That's some good thinking there pal...

Yea, pass.

No. I am the wrong chic to play hug a thug.

 

[eflatminor]

Sorry, did I really what?

Did you really just make that comparison?

If you have a point, state it clearly man. Do you think we should treat adults engaged in consensual activity the same as someone that murders another person? Life in prison, the death penalty, etc., all on the table for a person that provided a product that another adult asked and paid for.

I say those parents made their own bed by purchasing and using a dangerous drug. I do not support equivocating the selling of that drug with murdering another person.

If you do, the yes, I've made that comparison. FAR more people die in automobile accidents than drug overdoses.

The comparison makes clear how monumentally stupid it is to suggest an adult that never hurt nor took from another should face murder charges.

Whatever your position, stop being childish and state it.

I stated my position in the OP. It stands.

Great, then by your logic, we can hold a car salesman guilty of murder if the guy who bought the car wraps himself around a tree.

That's some good thinking there pal...

Yea, pass.

No. I am the wrong chic to play hug a thug.

Biggest thug of them all, your local grocer. He's selling the junk food that leads to heart disease, for some parents anyway. Charge him with murder! Oh, and the guy that sells televisions is facilitating the sedentary lifestyle that also contributes to heart disease, our #1 killer. Off to prison he goes!

Again, pass.

 

[Disir]

Did you really just make that comparison?

If you have a point, state it clearly man. Do you think we should treat adults engaged in consensual activity the same as someone that murders another person? Life in prison, the death penalty, etc., all on the table for a person that provided a product that another adult asked and paid for.

I say those parents made their own bed by purchasing and using a dangerous drug. I do not support equivocating the selling of that drug with murdering another person.

If you do, the yes, I've made that comparison. FAR more people die in automobile accidents than drug overdoses.

The comparison makes clear how monumentally stupid it is to suggest an adult that never hurt nor took from another should face murder charges.

Whatever your position, stop being childish and state it.

I stated my position in the OP. It stands.

Great, then by your logic, we can hold a car salesman guilty of murder if the guy who bought the car wraps himself around a tree.

That's some good thinking there pal...

Yea, pass.

No. I am the wrong chic to play hug a thug.

Biggest thug of them all, your local grocer. He's selling the junk food that leads to heart disease, for some parents anyway. Charge him with murder! Oh, and the guy that sells televisions is facilitating the sedentary lifestyle that also contributes to heart disease, our #1 killer. Off to prison he goes!

Again, pass.

Lucky for you, I don't care. I have little use for people who live in the abstract.

 

[Vastator]

These stories make me sick...

 

[EvilCat Breath]

There is nothing that would make the proponents of illegal drug use give up getting high. Heroin is like Tylenol. It's as harmless as potato chips. If a child has to deal with parental abuse and death, that's okay. It's nothing that can't be fixed by getting the child hooked on drugs too.

 

[Harry Dresden]

Oh, well why don't we just enslave everyone and make sure they can never make a "bad choice" ever again. After all, it's for their own good.

Sometimes restrictions of accountability help people make prudent choices.

I'm sorry but I don't think "restrictions of accountability" makes any sense in or out of context.

So you don't believe drunk driving laws are an effective deterrent?

Drunk driving laws haven't stopped drunk drivers. According to gun nuts, no law is effective unless it's 100% effective.

You mean drunk drivers who are arrested and incarcerated still drive drunk while they're in jail? How do they do that?

you ever hear of the ones who are repeat drunk drivers?..

 

[Disir]

Sometimes restrictions of accountability help people make prudent choices.

I'm sorry but I don't think "restrictions of accountability" makes any sense in or out of context.

So you don't believe drunk driving laws are an effective deterrent?

Drunk driving laws haven't stopped drunk drivers. According to gun nuts, no law is effective unless it's 100% effective.

You mean drunk drivers who are arrested and incarcerated still drive drunk while they're in jail? How do they do that?

you ever hear of the ones who are repeat drunk drivers?..

My ex husband has 8 OWIs.....and his license.

 

[Harry Dresden]

I'm sorry but I don't think "restrictions of accountability" makes any sense in or out of context.

So you don't believe drunk driving laws are an effective deterrent?

Drunk driving laws haven't stopped drunk drivers. According to gun nuts, no law is effective unless it's 100% effective.

You mean drunk drivers who are arrested and incarcerated still drive drunk while they're in jail? How do they do that?

you ever hear of the ones who are repeat drunk drivers?..

My ex husband has 8 OWIs.....and his license.

and he still has a license?...

 

[Disir]

So you don't believe drunk driving laws are an effective deterrent?

Drunk driving laws haven't stopped drunk drivers. According to gun nuts, no law is effective unless it's 100% effective.

You mean drunk drivers who are arrested and incarcerated still drive drunk while they're in jail? How do they do that?

you ever hear of the ones who are repeat drunk drivers?..

My ex husband has 8 OWIs.....and his license.

and he still has a license?...

Yep. It's all about hug a thugs and............the right attorney.