It is my opinion that a proverbial "line in the sand", needs to be drawn: this here is okay, and that there is not! And our government has drawn this line, telling us "alcohol is okay, but marijuana is not...Our government has redrawn those lines frequently enough (Alcohol is illegal! Wait, just kidding, no it's not!) that no sane person can assume they have any absolute merit outside of what currently managed to get passed by some committee. For that same reason, the stance that "our government has told us what to do, and we must respect all existing laws without questioning them" is ignored by everyone fighting overturn Roe v. Wade, for example -- and everyone arguing against the new health care bill, for that matter.
That doesn't make them bad citizens; it makes them involved citizens of a representative republic (not a monarchy). Far from being verboten, questioning the logic of laws is the DUTY of any real patriot.
I'm not advocating any illegal actions, by the way, but what I AM saying is that to lie back and accept that unreasonable laws be retained -- simply because they've been passed, and for no other reason than that -- is a coward's way to lie down under an overlord and not take responsibility for one's own government. Unreasonable laws should be spoken against by concerned citizens. We have the right to vote for a reason. Let's use it wisely, to retain good laws and reject bad ones.
Ironically many of the people impacted by this and other unjust laws lose their right to vote for the rest of their lives in effect making them literally second class citizens. It seems perverse to me that these people lose the right to vote about repealing the laws that cost them the right to vote.
|
It seems perverse to me that these people lose the right to vote about repealing the laws that cost them the right to vote.
But for good or bad, the law is there...
If you break that law (even an unjust law), you pay the consequences!
Laws are not moral codes we pick and choose to live by...
I feel no pity for those that lose their right to do something because they willingly broke a law simply because they thought it was unjust and not worthy to be obeyed...
Damn. Pigs caught me speedin' 27 in a 25 at least three times in Southern Cali. Three strikes. Can't drive any more and in the pokey. But hey, I broke a law. Rules are rules.
Damn. Pigs caught me speedin' 27 in a 25 at least three times in Southern Cali. Three strikes. Can't drive any more and in the pokey. But hey, I broke a law. Rules are rules.
** spoiler omitted **
If that was the law, then yup, sucks to be you. Cover your bung-hole my friend.
|
|
Damn. Pigs caught me speedin' 27 in a 25 at least three times in Southern Cali. Three strikes. Can't drive any more and in the pokey. But hey, I broke a law. Rules are rules.
See my post above about a line in the sand...
Sure, a cop stopping you for going 2 MPH over the posted limit would be a little "badge heavy", but personally, if I got popped twice for doing the same thing, I'd start looking for common denominators within that particular equation...
If that was the law, then yup, sucks to be you. Cover your bung-hole my friend.Damn. Pigs caught me speedin' 27 in a 25 at least three times in Southern Cali. Three strikes. Can't drive any more and in the pokey. But hey, I broke a law. Rules are rules.
** spoiler omitted **
Remind me to put in a transfer to a prison that uses liquid soap.
Damn. Pigs caught me speedin' 27 in a 25 at least three times in Southern Cali. Three strikes. Can't drive any more and in the pokey. But hey, I broke a law. Rules are rules.See my post above about a line in the sand...
Sure, a cop stopping you for going 2 MPH over the posted limit would be a little "badge heavy", but personally, if I got popped twice for doing the same thing, I'd start looking for common denominators within that particular equation...
I didn't have any jelly donuts in transit.
|
I didn't have any jelly donuts in transit.Damn. Pigs caught me speedin' 27 in a 25 at least three times in Southern Cali. Three strikes. Can't drive any more and in the pokey. But hey, I broke a law. Rules are rules.See my post above about a line in the sand...
Sure, a cop stopping you for going 2 MPH over the posted limit would be a little "badge heavy", but personally, if I got popped twice for doing the same thing, I'd start looking for common denominators within that particular equation...
All three times? For shame!
All three times? For shame!
That and a "I donated to the F.O.P." sticker.
Remind me to put in a transfer to a prison that uses liquid soap.If that was the law, then yup, sucks to be you. Cover your bung-hole my friend.Damn. Pigs caught me speedin' 27 in a 25 at least three times in Southern Cali. Three strikes. Can't drive any more and in the pokey. But hey, I broke a law. Rules are rules.
** spoiler omitted **
Better lubrication?
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
I thought we were discussing changes to the law, not whether it's okay to break it. Did I miss something?You're an old timer here! When does any thread stay specifically on topic?? ;-p
Got it. We're on the HoustonDerek tangent. I was just confused because there wasn't a lot of quoting going on.
FWIW, I think his main argument is not that people should not be punished for breaking the law, it's that they shouldn't continue to be punished through discrimination after they've served their time.
<SNIP>I'm not necessarily against it. I just don't see a good reason to legalize it.
And there's your problem. We don't need a reason to "legalize" something; the government should need to present a compelling reason to prohibit something. They haven't, ergo...
I thought we were discussing changes to the law, not whether it's okay to break it. Did I miss something?You're an old timer here! When does any thread stay specifically on topic?? ;-pGot it. We're on the HoustonDerek tangent. I was just confused because there wasn't a lot of quoting going on.
FWIW, I think his main argument is not that people should not be punished for breaking the law, it's that they shouldn't continue to be punished through discrimination after they've served their time.
Is this a general belief or a specific one tied to drug use/dealing?
I mean, should society be fine with a convicted child molester leaving prison to following their dream of becoming a child care provider? I mean, they paid their debt to society right? So clean slate.
|
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
Is this a general belief or a specific one tied to drug use/dealing?I mean, should society be fine with a convicted child molester leaving prison to following their dream of becoming a child care provider? I mean, they paid their debt to society right? So clean slate.
Don't ask me; I'm not interested in discussing. People seem to be missing Derek's point and arguing against some imaginary point no one has made re: breaking the law.
Is this a general belief or a specific one tied to drug use/dealing?
I mean, should society be fine with a convicted child molester leaving prison to following their dream of becoming a child care provider? I mean, they paid their debt to society right? So clean slate.
Can't speak for him, but for me: People shouldn't continue to be punished through discrimination after they've served their time UNLESS there is a compelling reason to do so, usually involving the rights of another individual. Child molester? Yes, I see your point. Drug dealers? Not so much...
Like most (all?) things, there are few absolutes.
|
I thought we were discussing changes to the law, not whether it's okay to break it. Did I miss something?You're an old timer here! When does any thread stay specifically on topic?? ;-pGot it. We're on the HoustonDerek tangent. I was just confused because there wasn't a lot of quoting going on.
FWIW, I think his main argument is not that people should not be punished for breaking the law, it's that they shouldn't continue to be punished through discrimination after they've served their time.
Is this a general belief or a specific one tied to drug use/dealing?
I mean, should society be fine with a convicted child molester leaving prison to following their dream of becoming a child care provider? I mean, they paid their debt to society right? So clean slate.
If it makes you feel better, child molesters generally get a lot less time than I did. Apparently this society you're so happy to defend thinks my selling dope to consenting adults was much more dangerous than someone fondling and raping six year olds...
|
|
I thought we were discussing changes to the law, not whether it's okay to break it. Did I miss something?You're an old timer here! When does any thread stay specifically on topic?? ;-pGot it. We're on the HoustonDerek tangent. I was just confused because there wasn't a lot of quoting going on.
FWIW, I think his main argument is not that people should not be punished for breaking the law, it's that they shouldn't continue to be punished through discrimination after they've served their time.
Basically.
|
|
Is this a general belief or a specific one tied to drug use/dealing?
I mean, should society be fine with a convicted child molester leaving prison to following their dream of becoming a child care provider? I mean, they paid their debt to society right? So clean slate.
Can't speak for him, but for me: People shouldn't continue to be punished through discrimination after they've served their time UNLESS there is a compelling reason to do so, usually involving the rights of another individual. Child molester? Yes, I see your point. Drug dealers? Not so much...
Like most (all?) things, there are few absolutes.
To take this a step further: I sold drugs because I really REALLY like money, hot women and exotic vacations. And I have no patience for law school. I can learn to be patient and live with less.
I don't think a child molester can "learn" to not be attracted to children.
I thought we were discussing changes to the law, not whether it's okay to break it. Did I miss something?You're an old timer here! When does any thread stay specifically on topic?? ;-pGot it. We're on the HoustonDerek tangent. I was just confused because there wasn't a lot of quoting going on.
FWIW, I think his main argument is not that people should not be punished for breaking the law, it's that they shouldn't continue to be punished through discrimination after they've served their time.
Is this a general belief or a specific one tied to drug use/dealing?
I mean, should society be fine with a convicted child molester leaving prison to following their dream of becoming a child care provider? I mean, they paid their debt to society right? So clean slate.
I think the idea should apply to non violent offenders at the minimum. Should stealing a car at 18 for a joyride really ruin the rest of someones life? How does this help anyone?
Better lubrication?Remind me to put in a transfer to a prison that uses liquid soap.If that was the law, then yup, sucks to be you. Cover your bung-hole my friend.Damn. Pigs caught me speedin' 27 in a 25 at least three times in Southern Cali. Three strikes. Can't drive any more and in the pokey. But hey, I broke a law. Rules are rules.
** spoiler omitted **
I didn't think of that. I was thinking more in line of something that I wouldn't drop and have to pick up. Any other suggestions? You seem to be an old hand at this. ;)
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 16, RPG Superstar 2013 Top 16
|
Dammit. Board ate my post discussing how marijuana laws are generally considered moral laws whereas speed limits are arbitrary laws like driving on one side of the road or the other. I'm not going to rehash (har har) it but the gist was that the system understands that speed limits are arbitrary and therefore enforcement of them is lax. I don't think marijuana use is a moral evil; notwithstanding, anti-drug laws are considered to be based on morality rather than arbitrary like speed limits. Stop yourself right there before you protest. I am not arguing that drug laws are morally correct. I am not saying that they are not actually arbitrary. I am saying that the folks who wrote them did so with a moral intent (like writing laws against burglary or murder) rather than an arbitrary intent (like setting speed limits or the fact that red lights indicate stop instead of go).
EDIT: HD, I'd hire you (hypothetically--I'm a soldier so I'm not in a position to hire anybody). Anybody who can make a pile of cash dealing obviously has some business savvy and salesmanship skills.
|
|
I really don't even care about voting (in Texas, I'll get my voting rights back as soon as I'm off paper) or owning a gun (in Texas, I can get my right to own a gun for home defense back five years after I'm off paper) or becoming a [insert a bunch of jobs that require special licensing], I just want to be able to get a decent job. One that doesn't require underwater welding, climbing 100 ft. towers or anything else that has a decent chance of causing my newborn daughter to grow up without a dad.
Edit: I have a friend that lost half his foot underwater welding, and would have lost his life if his dive partner wasn't a cool customer. He came out of prison with two kids, a wife and a lot of debt, and it was the only job available that could get him back on track.
I can learn to be patient and live with less.
I don't think a child molester can "learn" to not be attracted to children.
But didn't you say:
I struggle EVERY DAY with not going back to what I used to do.
** spoiler omitted **
If you ask me, I'm more worried about the pill popper toking up on oxycotin than the stoner smokin' a spliff if we're talking about laws for the sake of morality. It is still hypocritical to this day that alcohol and tobacco is legal and pot isn't. And I don't have any vested interest in it as I've only gotten as far as second hand smoke at hundreds of concerts. I have too many other vices to worry about.
I can learn to be patient and live with less.
I don't think a child molester can "learn" to not be attracted to children.
But didn't you say:
I struggle EVERY DAY with not going back to what I used to do.
But the point is he does it, whereas a child molester often doesn't (or can't).
<chews loudly> But these brownies...they taste soooo good...
|
|
I can learn to be patient and live with less.
I don't think a child molester can "learn" to not be attracted to children.
But didn't you say:
I struggle EVERY DAY with not going back to what I used to do.
Well, being broke does suck. But, it's been three years now, and I haven't gone back yet. Trust me, it isn't easy. It's hard not going back to making $40k a week, and living on $12 an hour. I have to remind myself how much prison sucked all the time.
Edit: My point is, while it would be easy to make a phone call or two and have all of my money problems go away, I don't. However bad life can get for me, however badly I'm treated by employers, nothing is so bad that I want to share an 8x12 room with two other dudes again.
But didn't you say:
I struggle EVERY DAY with not going back to what I used to do.
Way to take his quote out of context. His point seemed clear to me -- that he is denied legitimate means of supporting himself, so naturally it's tempting to resort to illegal ones -- even though he doesn't. If the law were changed so that he was actually allowed to have a job, then that everyday struggle would be a hell of a lot easier for him, was the implication -- because his crime was one of avarice made in a conscious choice, not a crime of being completely totally demented.
EDIT: Ninja'd by the man hisself!
I can learn to be patient and live with less.
I don't think a child molester can "learn" to not be attracted to children.
But didn't you say:
I struggle EVERY DAY with not going back to what I used to do.Well, being broke does suck. But, it's been three years now, and I haven't gone back yet. Trust me, it isn't easy. It's hard not going back to making $40k a week, and living on $12 an hour. I have to remind myself how much prison sucked all the time.
What are you pulling down, like $21,000 a year before taxes? That ain't bad.
What are you pulling down, like $21,000 a year before taxes? That ain't bad.
That also assumes 40-hour+ weeks and consistent work, not the reality of being let go every couple of months when they do a background check and realize that "record = no job allowed."
<SNIP>I'm not necessarily against it. I just don't see a good reason to legalize it.And there's your problem. We don't need a reason to "legalize" something; the government should need to present a compelling reason to prohibit something. They haven't, ergo...
There are a lot of facets to this issue, but they all concern me quite a bit less than this one.
Shouldn't the burden of proof be entirely on the government to prove how something harms someone besides the consenting adult doing "it" in order to criminalize whatever "it" is?
We seem to have arrived at a place as a nation where the basic assumption is no longer that you can do as you please when it hurts no one else.
For me this is the point where a society is no longer free.
What are you pulling down, like $21,000 a year before taxes? That ain't bad.I can learn to be patient and live with less.
I don't think a child molester can "learn" to not be attracted to children.
But didn't you say:
I struggle EVERY DAY with not going back to what I used to do.Well, being broke does suck. But, it's been three years now, and I haven't gone back yet. Trust me, it isn't easy. It's hard not going back to making $40k a week, and living on $12 an hour. I have to remind myself how much prison sucked all the time.
I hope you're joking.
What are you pulling down, like $21,000 a year before taxes? That ain't bad.
$21k before taxes versus $40k a week doesn't even compare...
What are you pulling down, like $21,000 a year before taxes? That ain't bad.$21k before taxes versus $40k a week doesn't even compare...
Is that the issue, it is too hard not to live the high life? Sorry, there are lots of people that would love to be making $12/hr and they haven't been to prison at all. Sounds a bit like sour grapes to me.
|
|
What are you pulling down, like $21,000 a year before taxes? That ain't bad.That also assumes 40-hour+ weeks and consistent work, not the reality of being let go every couple of months when they do a background check and realize that "record = no job allowed."
Yeah, that's kinda what happened with the last job. A former employee whom I had to let go for stealing told the owner about my record. I was gone within two weeks, after training my replacement. Two weeks before my daughter was born.
Eh, that's what I get for thinking that "Have you been convicted in the last seven years" line on the application meant anything.
Is that the issue, it is too hard not to live the high life? Sorry, there are lots of people that would love to be making $12/hr and they haven't been to prison at all. Sounds a bit like sour grapes to me.What are you pulling down, like $21,000 a year before taxes? That ain't bad.$21k before taxes versus $40k a week doesn't even compare...
That depends on geographical locations, I suppose. For some of us (including myself), $12/hour isn't enough. Is it for you?
|
|
Is that the issue, it is too hard not to live the high life? Sorry, there are lots of people that would love to be making $12/hr and they haven't been to prison at all. Sounds a bit like sour grapes to me.What are you pulling down, like $21,000 a year before taxes? That ain't bad.$21k before taxes versus $40k a week doesn't even compare...
I don't want to live the "high life", I had my moment in the sun. I want to be able to pay rent, bills AND eat, not chose which two of the three I get to do until the next check.
Eh, that's what I get for thinking that "Have you been convicted in the last seven years" line on the application meant anything.
Dumb question, but how did you actually answer that question when you first filled out the application or posed the question?
|
|
Eh, that's what I get for thinking that "Have you been convicted in the last seven years" line on the application meant anything.Dumb question, but how did you actually answer that question when you first filled out the application or posed the question?
I was convicted a little over ten years ago, so I put "no".
|
|
`Actually, the worst part, from a gamer's perspective is when they took everything I owned, including my nearly complete 1e/OD&D/Basic/Expert TSR collection, along with my nearly complete Judge's Guild/Chaosium/Palladium/MERP/Champions/etc collections.
And I shoveled sidewalks and raked leaves in the early '80s for that, not sold dope...
It seems perverse to me that these people lose the right to vote about repealing the laws that cost them the right to vote.But for good or bad, the law is there...
If you break that law (even an unjust law), you pay the consequences!
Laws are not moral codes we pick and choose to live by...
I feel no pity for those that lose their right to do something because they willingly broke a law simply because they thought it was unjust and not worthy to be obeyed...
We have a fundamental disagreement then.
I'm not trying to advocate illegal activity.
OTOH, I believe that perfectly reasonable arguments can be made for justice being more important than law.
Let me use an example that I believe will resonate with law and order conservatives. If a gun control law prevents one from protecting their family is it better to let your family be raped and murdered or to violate the law and save your family? If a drug that will save or extend your child's life is illegal do you violate the law and become a drug criminal for the rest of your life or watch you child die? Would society have been better served by Rosa Parks going to prison? After all she willfully broke the law.
Yes these are broad and extreme examples. Please don't derail the thread into gun control. My point is simply that breaking a law may be the more just option than obeying the law.
I think justice is far more important than law. Others may disagree.
I was convicted a little over ten years ago, so I put "no".Eh, that's what I get for thinking that "Have you been convicted in the last seven years" line on the application meant anything.Dumb question, but how did you actually answer that question when you first filled out the application or posed the question?
Just out of curiosity, how long were you at that job and did you get any prior notice (written/verbal) warning or did you get dropped just like that? Hopefully they're allowing you to collect unemployment, otherwise you may actually have a case.
That depends on geographical locations, I suppose. For some of us (including myself), $12/hour isn't enough. Is it for you?Is that the issue, it is too hard not to live the high life? Sorry, there are lots of people that would love to be making $12/hr and they haven't been to prison at all. Sounds a bit like sour grapes to me.What are you pulling down, like $21,000 a year before taxes? That ain't bad.$21k before taxes versus $40k a week doesn't even compare...
Could I survive on making just $12/hr, yeah. It would mean not having "date night" with my wife every friday. It would mean eating at home alot more than I do now. It would mean pinching some pennies, but it would be do-able.
|
|
Could I survive on making just $12/hr, yeah. It would mean not having "date night" with my wife every friday. It would mean eating at home alot more than I do now. It would mean pinching some pennies, but it would be do-able.That depends on geographical locations, I suppose. For some of us (including myself), $12/hour isn't enough. Is it for you?Is that the issue, it is too hard not to live the high life? Sorry, there are lots of people that would love to be making $12/hr and they haven't been to prison at all. Sounds a bit like sour grapes to me.What are you pulling down, like $21,000 a year before taxes? That ain't bad.$21k before taxes versus $40k a week doesn't even compare...
This assumes your wife isn't working either, and throw a newborn in the mix.
|
|
Just out of curiosity, how long were you at that job and did you get any prior notice (written/verbal) warning or did you get dropped just like that? Hopefully they're allowing you to collect unemployment, otherwise you may actually have a case.I was convicted a little over ten years ago, so I put "no".Eh, that's what I get for thinking that "Have you been convicted in the last seven years" line on the application meant anything.Dumb question, but how did you actually answer that question when you first filled out the application or posed the question?
I can probably get unemployment, but Texas is a "right to work" state, wrongful termination is a PITA, and unless it's a no-brainer, a lot of lawyers won't touch the case.
This assumes your wife isn't working either, and throw a newborn in the mix.Could I survive on making just $12/hr, yeah. It would mean not having "date night" with my wife every friday. It would mean eating at home alot more than I do now. It would mean pinching some pennies, but it would be do-able.That depends on geographical locations, I suppose. For some of us (including myself), $12/hour isn't enough. Is it for you?Is that the issue, it is too hard not to live the high life? Sorry, there are lots of people that would love to be making $12/hr and they haven't been to prison at all. Sounds a bit like sour grapes to me.What are you pulling down, like $21,000 a year before taxes? That ain't bad.$21k before taxes versus $40k a week doesn't even compare...
I really thought he was joking.
Wow.
This assumes your wife isn't working either, and throw a newborn in the mix.Could I survive on making just $12/hr, yeah. It would mean not having "date night" with my wife every friday. It would mean eating at home alot more than I do now. It would mean pinching some pennies, but it would be do-able.That depends on geographical locations, I suppose. For some of us (including myself), $12/hour isn't enough. Is it for you?Is that the issue, it is too hard not to live the high life? Sorry, there are lots of people that would love to be making $12/hr and they haven't been to prison at all. Sounds a bit like sour grapes to me.What are you pulling down, like $21,000 a year before taxes? That ain't bad.$21k before taxes versus $40k a week doesn't even compare...I really thought he was joking.
Wow.
I spent 6 years as an undergraduate, I learned to live cheaply.