An Iconic Fantasy Baseball Community
Moderator: Baseball Moderators
davidmarver wrote:And as far as marijuana being a harmless drug, I don't see how that is. It alters your mind-set and doesn't allow you to percieve things as they are.
Phatferd wrote:davidmarver wrote:And as far as marijuana being a harmless drug, I don't see how that is. It alters your mind-set and doesn't allow you to percieve things as they are.
I would argue that normal pot, not this chronic stuff, doesn't really alter your mind. At least not in a way that is harmful. I suffer from anxiety and I used to smoke Pot and it helped me out a lot. I stopped doing it, but it was/is the best thing for my anxiety. It obviously alters my brain to help with my problem, however, it didn't hinder me in any way. I never did anything dangerous or put people in danger.
Madison wrote:Can't believe there's a thread defending the practice of breaking the law by having, using, and/or selling an illegal drug.
How many million people go over the speed limit in cars? Should we just do away with speed limits completely? Of course not. Just because a bunch of people smoke pot, that doesn't automatically make it legal. They get locked up and do time. They know they are breaking the law, and are choosing to do it anyway. Doesn't matter if it's 15 people or 15 million people. The law is the law. Don't like it? Move to another country that's silly enough to allow it. Otherwise, just hope your cellmate isn't named "Big Bubba" or something similar.
I still think the child molester should be put in "gen pop" for awhile though.
Phatferd wrote:According to your logic then you should go to jail for any law you break? Have you ever Jaywalked, Downloaded music?
Phatferd wrote:I know you like to Gamble, do you claim every single earning you make on your taxes? Even the money they don't tax at the Casinos? You know all those $100 pots you pick up a night that add up to thousands of dollars at the end of the year?
Phatferd wrote:I think the people you claim are "defending" pot users are just saying that they shouldn't be put in jail. Pay a fine, do community service if you get busted? Yeah, you should. Should someone who gets busted for possesion of a gram or less waste space in our jails? No.
Phatferd wrote:Thats where we disagree. I don't think a person should be punished for whatever they decide to do in their own house, that does not harm another person. If Joe Shmo wants to light up a reefer and smoke it then by all means knock yourself out.
I just don't get the mindset that thinks we should clog our prisons up with harmless people for harmless acts. You can argue that some drug abusers and probably most do horrible things while on drugs (I argue pot is not high at all) and those people should be punished. If some dude has a little bit of Pot on him and isn't high or used it yet, they shouldn't be put in jail, just a ticket or whatever. Don't tell me that they wouldn't go to jail anyway because I have known and seen people getting arrested for this stuff.
Phatferd wrote:You can say how you itemize your taxes to get tax credit for all of your expenses, but gambling is not a job and you cannot write off exemptions for money spent while gambling. So if you do itemize you are doing it under another form of employment.
Tax fraud is a felony, which is at least a couple of years in jail. I am sure every single thing you itemize on your taxes is 100% correct to the very last penny
Phatferd wrote:We just disagree. Different philosophies. No worries. Just wanted to clarify your comments saying we defend people who break the law. I am speaking for myself, and I don't defend them, they should get some kind of punishment, they know the risks of what they do. I am just saying jail is a stupid choice in my book. All it does is waste our money and those corners you cut on taxes don't help when paying for them in the slammer. lol
Mookie4ever wrote:I agree that it sucks that he got zero jail time but when a child is involved the main concern for the court is always what is in the best interests of the child.
If putting him behind bars meant that the child had to go through the trauma of testifying in court and at the end of the day it would mean that he would get no child support because a sentence would cancel the offender's pension then even if it sucks don't you think that it is better for the child not to send him to prison.
You've got to balance the purposes of jail time (deterrence, vengence, rehabilitation and removing a threat from society) against the potential harm to the child.
What should have happened is the DA should have thought of a way of getting the evidence in without having the child testify (video evidence or something else) and then the police pension people or the government should have agreed to pay the child the support that he would have lost. Then they should have gone ahead and locked the guy up.
The trouble is that this costs time and money and nobody wants to give that up for a kid who isn't even old enough to vote.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests