On Wed, 11 Jul 2007 12:50:58 -0400, "Joe Cilinceon"
> wrote:


>
>Economically it is cheaper to put a person in jail for life with no parole
>than put them to death. The average annual operating cost per inmate in the
>US is $22650. It can be as high as $30000 to as low as $14500 depending on
>the state. The average cost to put a person to death in California is about
>$250 Million per execution which is pretty close to a national average. The
>cost to house the prisoner is about the same but the legal fees involved are
>much higher due to the automatic appeal system.
>
>Numbers for the Department of Prisons.

And on top of that death is easy.
They should be put in general population.
They will find out what it means to be victimized.

On Wed, 11 Jul 2007 19:30:22 -0400, "Joe Cilinceon"
> wrote:


>We have more people in prison per capita than any nation on the planet. Most
>people serving prison terms are in for non violent crimes, drugs being the
>highest number. Now this also includes you local jails and stockades for
>short term offenders.
>
>Joe
>
Dealing drugs is a non violent crime?

On Jul 12, 10:20 am, Bobo Bonobo® > wrote:


>
> > > Today, in America, working class criminals are treated far
> > > more harshly than white-collar criminals.
>
> --Bryan


Your categorization of "working class" and "white-collar" leaves a
lot to be desired.
White-collar could be paper crime, or it could include any other crime
Same with "working class." It also could be paper crime and any other
crime.

Are you caught up in a "class" system?
Dee Dee

Years ago, our newspaper published
a detailed story about "what crime costs".......
Ours was a relatively low-crime area in Penna.
yet when you added up the costs on a county wide basis;

Police dept budget
salarys, vehicle cost, maintenance, and gas
county court system,
DA, ADA, judges and court personnel,
crime lab, county lockup
medical and dental service for prisoners,
our portion of the state prison system..
AND, PENSIONS !!
( good God, these people are generous to themselves )

I've heard legends where rural police would
nudge a dead body into an adjacent county,
because cost of the investigation, and prosecution
would break the county budget.



On Thu, 12 Jul 2007 04:53:35 -0700, Dee Dee > wrote:

>On Jul 12, 6:48 am, "Ophelia" > wrote:
>
>>
>> Why does an execution cost so much?
>
>Sorry to be so glib, but my first thought is:
>
>"Ours is only to wonder why"
>
>Couldn't resist,
>Dee Dee

<rj>

On Wed, 11 Jul 2007 20:12:13 -0400, "Joe Cilinceon"
> wrote:


>
>Really that may well be true but I don't tend to believe it. Putting someone
>in jail for 10 to 15 years for smoking a joint
Please give me a name of someone put in jail 10 to 15 years for a
joint, in the last 30 years.

>or life as a three time loser for a few petty theft charges
That is for three violent crimes

> We have a notion that
>regardless of what you did and why you may have done it you broke the law
>and have to pay the fullest penalty.
Yes that penalty is a bitch. Its called personal responsibility.

>Joe
>
>

"Pan Ohco" > wrote in message
...
> On Wed, 11 Jul 2007 19:30:22 -0400, "Joe Cilinceon"
> > wrote:
>
>
>>We have more people in prison per capita than any nation on the planet.
>>Most
>>people serving prison terms are in for non violent crimes, drugs being the
>>highest number. Now this also includes you local jails and stockades for
>>short term offenders.
>>
>>Joe
>>
> Dealing drugs is a non violent crime?


Depends. Are you talking about the effects of the drugs themselves being a
form of violence, because they're harmful? Or, are you talking about the
violence that exists as a result of the drugs being illegal?

On Jul 12, 10:02 am, Dee Dee > wrote:
> On Jul 12, 10:20 am, Bobo Bonobo® > wrote:
>
>
>
> > > > Today, in America, working class criminals are treated far
> > > > more harshly than white-collar criminals.
>
> > --Bryan
>
> Your categorization of "working class" and "white-collar" leaves a
> lot to be desired.

I use "white-collar" as it is commonly used to categorize the crimes.

> White-collar could be paper crime, or it could include any other crime
> Same with "working class." It also could be paper crime and any other
> crime.

How about decisions motivated by "greed," made by persons of authority
in the private sector which can easily be foreseen to cause the deaths
of persons? Is that OK.
>
> Are you caught up in a "class" system?

America is "caught up in a 'class' system."

Here in America, we've got class
Don'tchya ever let 'em tell ya
that we don't got class
Wanna see that every worker
feels a part of their class
Here in America, we've got class
--The Bonobos

> Dee Dee

--Bryan

On Thu, 12 Jul 2007 06:23:17 -0700, Bobo Bonobo® >
wrote:

> Belief in American justice is for chumps.

Well you have a right to say that, but that is because of American
justice.
>Belief that the American economy allocates wealth equitably is for chumps.*
American economy allocates wealth? Dam I thought I had to work for it.
Where do I apply for my share.
> Nationalism/patriotism is for chumps.
And the U.S. is one of the few places where you can say that aloud.
>--Bryan

On Jul 12, 10:49 am, Bobo Bonobo® > wrote:
> On Jul 12, 9:20 am, Dee Dee > wrote:
>
> > On Jul 12, 9:23 am, Bobo Bonobo®
>
> > > Belief that the American economy allocates wealth equitably is for chumps.
> > > --Bryan
>
> > "allocating wealth equitably" - is that Socialism?
>
> No. Socialism (pure Communistic Socialism) does not allocate wealth
> equitably, it allocates it equally, or at least "according to needs."
> There is a HUGE difference.
>
> --Bryan

I should have said,
"allocating wealth" - is that Socialism?
Dee Dee

"Pan Ohco" > wrote in message
...
> On Wed, 11 Jul 2007 19:30:22 -0400, "Joe Cilinceon"
> > wrote:
>
>
>>We have more people in prison per capita than any nation on the planet.
>>Most
>>people serving prison terms are in for non violent crimes, drugs being the
>>highest number. Now this also includes you local jails and stockades for
>>short term offenders.
>>
>>Joe
>>
> Dealing drugs is a non violent crime?

Dealing in bootlegged alcohol used to be violent crime also, until the
repeal of probation. As would drugs if they where to be legalized and
controlled. Also the none violent part I was meaning is the use of not the
distribution of and I don't advocate either the use or legalization of
drugs. Prostitution, gambling etc are also none violent crimes which I was
talking about. A state like Texas for example you could get 20 years for
smoking a joint.

Joe

On Jul 12, 11:39 am, "Joe Cilinceon" > wrote:
> "Pan Ohco" > wrote in message
>
> ...
>
> > On Wed, 11 Jul 2007 19:30:22 -0400, "Joe Cilinceon"
> > > wrote:
>
> >>We have more people in prison per capita than any nation on the planet.
> >>Most
> >>people serving prison terms are in for non violent crimes, drugs being the
> >>highest number. Now this also includes you local jails and stockades for
> >>short term offenders.
>
> >>Joe
>
> > Dealing drugs is a non violent crime?
>
> Dealing in bootlegged alcohol used to be violent crime also, until the
> repeal of probation. As would drugs if they where to be legalized and
> controlled. Also the none violent part I was meaning is the use of not the
> distribution of and I don't advocate either the use or legalization of
> drugs. Prostitution, gambling etc are also none violent crimes which I was
> talking about. A state like Texas for example you could get 20 years for
> smoking a joint.
>
> Joe

I'm not directing this to you specifically,

Hey, then don't smoke a joint. Plain and simple. That's the law.
Don't like it, change it or ... well, you know the rest.

I believe that prisons are for non-violent crimes, too. Perhaps
that's getting passe.
Dee Dee

On Jul 12, 11:03 am, "<RJ>" > wrote:
,> AND, PENSIONS !!
> ( good God, these people are generous to themselves )
> > <rj>

Wonder if they pay taxes on pensions. Pensions for government and
state workers are not taxable here in VA; unless it has changed, and I
rather doubt it.

Dee Dee

On Wed, 11 Jul 2007 17:47:19 -0700, Bobo Bonobo® >
wrote:

>A working person could easily be a Capitalist, as in one who believes
>in Capitalism. I was using small "c" capitalist to signify that class
>of persons who derive the overwhelming majority of their income from
>owning, rather than working. Sorry if that was confusing.


>--Bryan

Gee what category am I in now Bryan.
I worked, and made enough to invest, and now I'm getting money for
working and owning.
The majority of people in the U.S.have investments from which they
derive income. Housings, stock market, 401K's ect.

"Dee Dee" > wrote in message
ups.com...
> On Jul 12, 11:39 am, "Joe Cilinceon" > wrote:
>> "Pan Ohco" > wrote in message
>>
>> ...
>>
>> > On Wed, 11 Jul 2007 19:30:22 -0400, "Joe Cilinceon"
>> > > wrote:
>>
>> >>We have more people in prison per capita than any nation on the planet.
>> >>Most
>> >>people serving prison terms are in for non violent crimes, drugs being
>> >>the
>> >>highest number. Now this also includes you local jails and stockades
>> >>for
>> >>short term offenders.
>>
>> >>Joe
>>
>> > Dealing drugs is a non violent crime?
>>
>> Dealing in bootlegged alcohol used to be violent crime also, until the
>> repeal of probation. As would drugs if they where to be legalized and
>> controlled. Also the none violent part I was meaning is the use of not
>> the
>> distribution of and I don't advocate either the use or legalization of
>> drugs. Prostitution, gambling etc are also none violent crimes which I
>> was
>> talking about. A state like Texas for example you could get 20 years for
>> smoking a joint.
>>
>> Joe
>
> I'm not directing this to you specifically,
>
> Hey, then don't smoke a joint. Plain and simple. That's the law.
> Don't like it, change it or ... well, you know the rest.
>
> I believe that prisons are for non-violent crimes, too. Perhaps
> that's getting passe.
> Dee Dee
>

I'll make you a deal: You write to your federal and state elected slobs and
ask them why drugs are illegal, and what they're doing to change that. You
also need to ask them why alcohol is legal, since it's just as dangerous as
cocaine or heroin. If you get back even one reply that doesn't make you want
to puke (for lack of substance), and post a clear photo of it online, I will
send you a case of Florida citrus or something equally delicious.

On Jul 12, 11:17 am, Bobo Bonobo® >

>
> > Are you caught up in a "class" system?
>
> America is "caught up in a 'class' system."
>
> Here in America, we've got class
> Don'tchya ever let 'em tell ya
> that we don't got class
> Wanna see that every worker
> feels a part of their class
> Here in America, we've got class
> --The Bonobos
>
> > Dee Dee
>
> --Bryan

I'm here in America. I note that many people have less and more money
than I do. I know no one personally who has been caught up in the
legal system where class was a decision maker; nor in education, nor
in race.

I chose according to my means where I want to live and how I live
according to the law.

I still play Bob Dylan songs - ticky-tacky houses; who the hay is
Bonobos?
Dee Dee

"Dee Dee" > wrote in message
ups.com...
>
> I'm not directing this to you specifically,
>
> Hey, then don't smoke a joint. Plain and simple. That's the law.
> Don't like it, change it or ... well, you know the rest.
>
> I believe that prisons are for non-violent crimes, too. Perhaps
> that's getting passe.
> Dee Dee
>

I understand what you are saying Dee. All I'm suggesting is perhaps there
would be better ways of dealing with what people do to themselves that
really doesn't effect us. Now we demand they be arrested, stand trial and
punishment which ties up a lot of resources that are needed for much more
serious problems is all I was getting at. I personally don't care if the
guy up the street gives his money to a prostitute, gambles on football or
smokes a joint as long as he coming after me to feed his vices. I also don't
really care if it is legal or not since I'm well past those times in my
life.

Joe

On Jul 12, 11:52 am, "JoeSpareBedroom" > wrote:
A state like Texas for example you could get 20 years for
> >> smoking a joint.
>
> >> Joe
>
> > I'm not directing this to you specifically,
>
> > Hey, then don't smoke a joint. Plain and simple. That's the law.
> > Don't like it, change it or ... well, you know the rest.
>
> > I believe that prisons are for non-violent crimes, too. Perhaps
> > that's getting passe.
> > Dee Dee
>
> I'll make you a deal: You write to your federal and state elected slobs and
> ask them why drugs are illegal, and what they're doing to change that. You
> also need to ask them why alcohol is legal, since it's just as dangerous as
> cocaine or heroin. If you get back even one reply that doesn't make you want
> to puke (for lack of substance), and post a clear photo of it online, I will
> send you a case of Florida citrus or something equally delicious.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Why should I write to ask them why drugs are illegal. I WANT them to
continue to be illegal. But frankly, I have my own personal beliefs
as to why drugs are illegal and alcohol is legal.

But concering alcohol being dangerous, I wonder what the statistics
are for a drunk vs. a heroin or cocaine (or meth) user robbing and
maming.

Frankly, though, if they would make alcohol illegal, I'd obey the
law, try to get it changed so I could drink tasty wine and beer like
other civilized (France and Germany?) countries do. I don't think
society should be penalized for others' misdeeds on something as
basic as wine and beer. However, we are penalized over others'
simplest misdeeds constantly. A fact oflife.
Dee Dee

On Jul 12, 11:57 am, "Joe Cilinceon" > wrote:
> "Dee Dee" > wrote in message
>
> ups.com...
>
>
>
> > I'm not directing this to you specifically,
>
> > Hey, then don't smoke a joint. Plain and simple. That's the law.
> > Don't like it, change it or ... well, you know the rest.
>
> > I believe that prisons are for non-violent crimes, too. Perhaps
> > that's getting passe.
> > Dee Dee
>
> I understand what you are saying Dee. All I'm suggesting is perhaps there
> would be better ways of dealing with what people do to themselves that
> really doesn't effect us. Now we demand they be arrested, stand trial and
> punishment which ties up a lot of resources that are needed for much more
> serious problems is all I was getting at. I personally don't care if the
> guy up the street gives his money to a prostitute, gambles on football or
> smokes a joint as long as he coming after me to feed his vices. I also don't
> really care if it is legal or not since I'm well past those times in my
> life.
>
> Joe

I hear you. Prostitutes, gambling and joint-smoking. I guess all
these things do affect others lives in some round-a-bout way. Even
paying for the court costs of the crimes that these behaviors cause.

Prostitutes get beaten up, families are ruined by gambling; joint-
smoking - well, they 'say' it leads to other drugs and well, who wants
a 'slacker' as a mate? ;-))
Dee Dee

"Dee Dee" > wrote in message
ups.com...
> On Jul 12, 11:52 am, "JoeSpareBedroom" > wrote:
> A state like Texas for example you could get 20 years for
>> >> smoking a joint.
>>
>> >> Joe
>>
>> > I'm not directing this to you specifically,
>>
>> > Hey, then don't smoke a joint. Plain and simple. That's the law.
>> > Don't like it, change it or ... well, you know the rest.
>>
>> > I believe that prisons are for non-violent crimes, too. Perhaps
>> > that's getting passe.
>> > Dee Dee
>>
>> I'll make you a deal: You write to your federal and state elected slobs
>> and
>> ask them why drugs are illegal, and what they're doing to change that.
>> You
>> also need to ask them why alcohol is legal, since it's just as dangerous
>> as
>> cocaine or heroin. If you get back even one reply that doesn't make you
>> want
>> to puke (for lack of substance), and post a clear photo of it online, I
>> will
>> send you a case of Florida citrus or something equally delicious.- Hide
>> quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> Why should I write to ask them why drugs are illegal. I WANT them to
> continue to be illegal. But frankly, I have my own personal beliefs
> as to why drugs are illegal and alcohol is legal.
>
> But concering alcohol being dangerous, I wonder what the statistics
> are for a drunk vs. a heroin or cocaine (or meth) user robbing and
> maming.
>
> Frankly, though, if they would make alcohol illegal, I'd obey the
> law, try to get it changed so I could drink tasty wine and beer like
> other civilized (France and Germany?) countries do. I don't think
> society should be penalized for others' misdeeds on something as
> basic as wine and beer. However, we are penalized over others'
> simplest misdeeds constantly. A fact oflife.
> Dee Dee


Why do you want drugs to remain illegal?

As far as alcohol being dangerous, it *will* kill you, and often in ways
that you don't hear much about. Nothing to do with getting into accidents,
by the way. I lost my brother in law as a direct cause of alcohol.

"Dee Dee" > wrote in message
ups.com...
> On Jul 12, 11:57 am, "Joe Cilinceon" > wrote:
>> "Dee Dee" > wrote in message
>>
>> ups.com...
>>
>>
>>
>> > I'm not directing this to you specifically,
>>
>> > Hey, then don't smoke a joint. Plain and simple. That's the law.
>> > Don't like it, change it or ... well, you know the rest.
>>
>> > I believe that prisons are for non-violent crimes, too. Perhaps
>> > that's getting passe.
>> > Dee Dee
>>
>> I understand what you are saying Dee. All I'm suggesting is perhaps there
>> would be better ways of dealing with what people do to themselves that
>> really doesn't effect us. Now we demand they be arrested, stand trial and
>> punishment which ties up a lot of resources that are needed for much more
>> serious problems is all I was getting at. I personally don't care if the
>> guy up the street gives his money to a prostitute, gambles on football or
>> smokes a joint as long as he coming after me to feed his vices. I also
>> don't
>> really care if it is legal or not since I'm well past those times in my
>> life.
>>
>> Joe
>
> I hear you. Prostitutes, gambling and joint-smoking. I guess all
> these things do affect others lives in some round-a-bout way. Even
> paying for the court costs of the crimes that these behaviors cause.
>
> Prostitutes get beaten up, families are ruined by gambling; joint-
> smoking - well, they 'say' it leads to other drugs and well, who wants
> a 'slacker' as a mate? ;-))
> Dee Dee
>


Nobody still says marijuana leads to other drugs, except people who don't
read much. The theory was disassembled a very long time ago. With that in
mind, how are families "ruined" by marijuana use?

On Jul 12, 12:26 pm, "JoeSpareBedroom" > wrote:
> "Dee Dee" > wrote in message
>
> ups.com...
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jul 12, 11:52 am, "JoeSpareBedroom" > wrote:
> > A state like Texas for example you could get 20 years for
> >> >> smoking a joint.
>
> >> >> Joe
>
> >> > I'm not directing this to you specifically,
>
> >> > Hey, then don't smoke a joint. Plain and simple. That's the law.
> >> > Don't like it, change it or ... well, you know the rest.
>
> >> > I believe that prisons are for non-violent crimes, too. Perhaps
> >> > that's getting passe.
> >> > Dee Dee
>
> >> I'll make you a deal: You write to your federal and state elected slobs
> >> and
> >> ask them why drugs are illegal, and what they're doing to change that.
> >> You
> >> also need to ask them why alcohol is legal, since it's just as dangerous
> >> as
> >> cocaine or heroin. If you get back even one reply that doesn't make you
> >> want
> >> to puke (for lack of substance), and post a clear photo of it online, I
> >> will
> >> send you a case of Florida citrus or something equally delicious.- Hide
> >> quoted text -
>
> >> - Show quoted text -
>
> > Why should I write to ask them why drugs are illegal. I WANT them to
> > continue to be illegal. But frankly, I have my own personal beliefs
> > as to why drugs are illegal and alcohol is legal.
>
> > But concering alcohol being dangerous, I wonder what the statistics
> > are for a drunk vs. a heroin or cocaine (or meth) user robbing and
> > maming.
>
> > Frankly, though, if they would make alcohol illegal, I'd obey the
> > law, try to get it changed so I could drink tasty wine and beer like
> > other civilized (France and Germany?) countries do. I don't think
> > society should be penalized for others' misdeeds on something as
> > basic as wine and beer. However, we are penalized over others'
> > simplest misdeeds constantly. A fact oflife.
> > Dee Dee
>
> Why do you want drugs to remain illegal?
>
> As far as alcohol being dangerous, it *will* kill you, and often in ways
> that you don't hear much about. Nothing to do with getting into accidents,
> by the way. I lost my brother in law as a direct cause of alcohol.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

I understand the problems with alcohol and how they will not only kill
you, but will kill the spirit of those around you. Some say it is a
choice. I haven't made up my mind.

"Why do you want drugs to remain illegal?"
Good Lord, man; drugs are nothing but death and destruction. That's
that's a strong statement, but I couldn't make it stronger.
Dee Dee

"Dee Dee" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> On Jul 12, 12:26 pm, "JoeSpareBedroom" > wrote:
>> "Dee Dee" > wrote in message
>>
>> ups.com...
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > On Jul 12, 11:52 am, "JoeSpareBedroom" > wrote:
>> > A state like Texas for example you could get 20 years for
>> >> >> smoking a joint.
>>
>> >> >> Joe
>>
>> >> > I'm not directing this to you specifically,
>>
>> >> > Hey, then don't smoke a joint. Plain and simple. That's the law.
>> >> > Don't like it, change it or ... well, you know the rest.
>>
>> >> > I believe that prisons are for non-violent crimes, too. Perhaps
>> >> > that's getting passe.
>> >> > Dee Dee
>>
>> >> I'll make you a deal: You write to your federal and state elected
>> >> slobs
>> >> and
>> >> ask them why drugs are illegal, and what they're doing to change that.
>> >> You
>> >> also need to ask them why alcohol is legal, since it's just as
>> >> dangerous
>> >> as
>> >> cocaine or heroin. If you get back even one reply that doesn't make
>> >> you
>> >> want
>> >> to puke (for lack of substance), and post a clear photo of it online,
>> >> I
>> >> will
>> >> send you a case of Florida citrus or something equally delicious.-
>> >> Hide
>> >> quoted text -
>>
>> >> - Show quoted text -
>>
>> > Why should I write to ask them why drugs are illegal. I WANT them to
>> > continue to be illegal. But frankly, I have my own personal beliefs
>> > as to why drugs are illegal and alcohol is legal.
>>
>> > But concering alcohol being dangerous, I wonder what the statistics
>> > are for a drunk vs. a heroin or cocaine (or meth) user robbing and
>> > maming.
>>
>> > Frankly, though, if they would make alcohol illegal, I'd obey the
>> > law, try to get it changed so I could drink tasty wine and beer like
>> > other civilized (France and Germany?) countries do. I don't think
>> > society should be penalized for others' misdeeds on something as
>> > basic as wine and beer. However, we are penalized over others'
>> > simplest misdeeds constantly. A fact oflife.
>> > Dee Dee
>>
>> Why do you want drugs to remain illegal?
>>
>> As far as alcohol being dangerous, it *will* kill you, and often in ways
>> that you don't hear much about. Nothing to do with getting into
>> accidents,
>> by the way. I lost my brother in law as a direct cause of alcohol.- Hide
>> quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> I understand the problems with alcohol and how they will not only kill
> you, but will kill the spirit of those around you. Some say it is a
> choice. I haven't made up my mind.
>
> "Why do you want drugs to remain illegal?"
> Good Lord, man; drugs are nothing but death and destruction. That's
> that's a strong statement, but I couldn't make it stronger.
> Dee Dee
>

In ***what way*** are they death and destruction? The effect on the human
body? Or, the violence which accompanies the people who sell them illegally?

On Jul 12, 12:35 pm, "JoeSpareBedroom" > wrote:

>
> > I hear you. Prostitutes, gambling and joint-smoking. I guess all
> > these things do affect others lives in some round-a-bout way. Even
> > paying for the court costs of the crimes that these behaviors cause.
>
> > Prostitutes get beaten up, families are ruined by gambling; joint-
> > smoking - well, they 'say' it leads to other drugs and well, who wants
> > a 'slacker' as a mate? ;-))
> > Dee Dee
>
> Nobody still says marijuana leads to other drugs, except people who don't
> read much. The theory was disassembled a very long time ago. With that in
> mind, how are families "ruined" by marijuana use?- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

I didn't say that families are ruined by maijuana use.

I do read a lot, but not much about marijuana use or any other drug
use, so I am not uptodate on the disassemblage of that theory. If you
say it doesn't lead to other drugs, then you may be correct. If used
as a recreational drug, I would prefer it to stay illegal.
Dee Dee

"Dee Dee" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> On Jul 12, 12:35 pm, "JoeSpareBedroom" > wrote:
>
>>
>> > I hear you. Prostitutes, gambling and joint-smoking. I guess all
>> > these things do affect others lives in some round-a-bout way. Even
>> > paying for the court costs of the crimes that these behaviors cause.
>>
>> > Prostitutes get beaten up, families are ruined by gambling; joint-
>> > smoking - well, they 'say' it leads to other drugs and well, who wants
>> > a 'slacker' as a mate? ;-))
>> > Dee Dee
>>
>> Nobody still says marijuana leads to other drugs, except people who don't
>> read much. The theory was disassembled a very long time ago. With that in
>> mind, how are families "ruined" by marijuana use?- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> I didn't say that families are ruined by maijuana use.
>
> I do read a lot, but not much about marijuana use or any other drug
> use, so I am not uptodate on the disassemblage of that theory. If you
> say it doesn't lead to other drugs, then you may be correct. If used
> as a recreational drug, I would prefer it to stay illegal.
> Dee Dee


We're going around in circles here. Why should pot remain illegal? Just pot.
Not cocaine, heroin or other test tube drugs.

Why should pot remain illegal?

On Jul 12, 1:04 pm, "JoeSpareBedroom" > wrote:

>
> > I do read a lot, but not much about marijuana use or any other drug
> > use, so I am not uptodate on the disassemblage of that theory. If you
> > say it doesn't lead to other drugs, then you may be correct. If used
> > as a recreational drug, I would prefer it to stay illegal.
> > Dee Dee
>
> We're going around in circles here. Why should pot remain illegal? Just pot.
> Not cocaine, heroin or other test tube drugs.
>
> Why should pot remain illegal?- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Why are you curious regarding my opinion? I am a committed person
against present illegal drugs. This hasn't come up for vote, has
it? ;-) Then I would vote my choice at the voting machine.

Today I too much time on my hands staying out of the way for repair
persons and sitting here at the computer.
Dee Dee

"Dee Dee" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> On Jul 12, 1:04 pm, "JoeSpareBedroom" > wrote:
>
>>
>> > I do read a lot, but not much about marijuana use or any other drug
>> > use, so I am not uptodate on the disassemblage of that theory. If you
>> > say it doesn't lead to other drugs, then you may be correct. If used
>> > as a recreational drug, I would prefer it to stay illegal.
>> > Dee Dee
>>
>> We're going around in circles here. Why should pot remain illegal? Just
>> pot.
>> Not cocaine, heroin or other test tube drugs.
>>
>> Why should pot remain illegal?- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> Why are you curious regarding my opinion? I am a committed person
> against present illegal drugs. This hasn't come up for vote, has
> it? ;-) Then I would vote my choice at the voting machine.
>
> Today I too much time on my hands staying out of the way for repair
> persons and sitting here at the computer.
> Dee Dee


I'm asking because it makes no sense. Perhaps someday, we might all have the
opportunity to vote in a referendum on legalisation. Would you feel foolish
voting to keep pot illegal if your opinion had absolutely no basis in
scientific or medical facts?

JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
> "Dave Bugg" > wrote in message
> ...
>> JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
>>> "Dave Bugg" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
>>>>> "Dave Bugg" > wrote in message
>>>>> ...
>>>>>> JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The only segment of society that agrees with drug laws is the
>>>>>>> group who makes money from those laws:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Then it will be easy for you to convince society to change the
>>>>>> laws. But I sincerely doubt the force is with you.
>>>>
>>>>> Thomas Jefferson would've chewed you up and spit you out, Dave.
>>>>> Maybe danced on your face for dessert.
>>>>
>>>> <snork> Sure. LOL!!!
>>>> --
>>>> Dave
>>>
>>>
>>> Maybe someday you'll read what he wrote about the responsibilities
>>> of an American citizen. But first, do you know who he was?
>>
>> Give it a rest, Joe; you're coming across as a petulant child. If you
>> don't have anything of substance to say, so be it.
>>
>> --
>> Dave
>> www.davebbq.com
>>
>
> Substance????? You've refused to discuss a set of laws that are
> costing this country (and you) plenty of money to enforce. You are
> avoiding substance.

No, I've refused to play your game of constantly drifting the original
topic. As I said, if you want to argue the virtue of legalizing drugs, start
a new thread.
--
Dave
www.davebbq.com

"Dave Bugg" > wrote in message
...
> JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
>> "Dave Bugg" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
>>>> "Dave Bugg" > wrote in message
>>>> ...
>>>>> JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
>>>>>> "Dave Bugg" > wrote in message
>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>> JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The only segment of society that agrees with drug laws is the
>>>>>>>> group who makes money from those laws:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Then it will be easy for you to convince society to change the
>>>>>>> laws. But I sincerely doubt the force is with you.
>>>>>
>>>>>> Thomas Jefferson would've chewed you up and spit you out, Dave.
>>>>>> Maybe danced on your face for dessert.
>>>>>
>>>>> <snork> Sure. LOL!!!
>>>>> --
>>>>> Dave
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Maybe someday you'll read what he wrote about the responsibilities
>>>> of an American citizen. But first, do you know who he was?
>>>
>>> Give it a rest, Joe; you're coming across as a petulant child. If you
>>> don't have anything of substance to say, so be it.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Dave
>>> www.davebbq.com
>>>
>>
>> Substance????? You've refused to discuss a set of laws that are
>> costing this country (and you) plenty of money to enforce. You are
>> avoiding substance.
>
> No, I've refused to play your game of constantly drifting the original
> topic. As I said, if you want to argue the virtue of legalizing drugs,
> start a new thread.
> --
> Dave
> www.davebbq.com
>

I doubt you would participate in a new thread on the subject. It's rigid and
absurd to not continue it right here.

JoeSpareBedroom wrote:

> I doubt you would participate in a new thread on the subject. It's
> rigid and absurd to not continue it right here.

What's rigid and absurd is your tiresome rhetorical games. As was said, the
only way you can survive a debate is to evolve argument away from the
original topic. It's your trademark and a very shallow rhetorical tactic. It
don't work with me.

--
Dave
www.davebbq.com

On Jul 12, 1:31 pm, "JoeSpareBedroom" > wrote:

>
> >> Why should pot remain illegal?- Hide quoted text -
>
> >> - Show quoted text -
>
> > Why are you curious regarding my opinion? I am a committed person
> > against present illegal drugs. This hasn't come up for vote, has
> > it? ;-) Then I would vote my choice at the voting machine.
>
> > Today I too much time on my hands staying out of the way for repair
> > persons and sitting here at the computer.
> > Dee Dee
>
> I'm asking because it makes no sense. Perhaps someday, we might all have the
> opportunity to vote in a referendum on legalisation. Would you feel foolish
> voting to keep pot illegal if your opinion had absolutely no basis in
> scientific or medical facts?- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

I can't figure out why CA isn't having a vote on legalizing drugs
every day. Was it a referendum on pot for medical reasons? And how
did that go?

Basing my opinion on scientific and/or medical facts would certainly
not be the whole story for me; I don't believe 'everything' I read in
print; first, I try to make an informed decision on who wrote it and
what their agenda is. I think many people are discerning anymore
about what they read and hear.

But I've made my feelings as clear as I wish to do and that's it for
now. There's no one else in this discussion and it's grown too, too
tedious.

Bye, Joe.
P.S. Please don't write something that will make me want to jump into
this conversation again.
Dee Dee

"Dee Dee" > wrote in message
ps.com...
> On Jul 12, 1:31 pm, "JoeSpareBedroom" > wrote:
>
>>
>> >> Why should pot remain illegal?- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> >> - Show quoted text -
>>
>> > Why are you curious regarding my opinion? I am a committed person
>> > against present illegal drugs. This hasn't come up for vote, has
>> > it? ;-) Then I would vote my choice at the voting machine.
>>
>> > Today I too much time on my hands staying out of the way for repair
>> > persons and sitting here at the computer.
>> > Dee Dee
>>
>> I'm asking because it makes no sense. Perhaps someday, we might all have
>> the
>> opportunity to vote in a referendum on legalisation. Would you feel
>> foolish
>> voting to keep pot illegal if your opinion had absolutely no basis in
>> scientific or medical facts?- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> I can't figure out why CA isn't having a vote on legalizing drugs
> every day. Was it a referendum on pot for medical reasons? And how
> did that go?
>
> Basing my opinion on scientific and/or medical facts would certainly
> not be the whole story for me; I don't believe 'everything' I read in
> print; first, I try to make an informed decision on who wrote it and
> what their agenda is. I think many people are discerning anymore
> about what they read and hear.
>
> But I've made my feelings as clear as I wish to do and that's it for
> now. There's no one else in this discussion and it's grown too, too
> tedious.
>
> Bye, Joe.
> P.S. Please don't write something that will make me want to jump into
> this conversation again.
> Dee Dee


Do you have any hobbies? What are they?

"Dee Dee" > wrote in message
ps.com...
> On Jul 12, 1:31 pm, "JoeSpareBedroom" > wrote:
>
>>
>> >> Why should pot remain illegal?- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> >> - Show quoted text -
>>
>> > Why are you curious regarding my opinion? I am a committed person
>> > against present illegal drugs. This hasn't come up for vote, has
>> > it? ;-) Then I would vote my choice at the voting machine.
>>
>> > Today I too much time on my hands staying out of the way for repair
>> > persons and sitting here at the computer.
>> > Dee Dee
>>
>> I'm asking because it makes no sense. Perhaps someday, we might all have
>> the
>> opportunity to vote in a referendum on legalisation. Would you feel
>> foolish
>> voting to keep pot illegal if your opinion had absolutely no basis in
>> scientific or medical facts?- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> I can't figure out why CA isn't having a vote on legalizing drugs
> every day. Was it a referendum on pot for medical reasons? And how
> did that go?
>
> Basing my opinion on scientific and/or medical facts would certainly
> not be the whole story for me; I don't believe 'everything' I read in
> print; first, I try to make an informed decision on who wrote it and
> what their agenda is. I think many people are discerning anymore
> about what they read and hear.
>
> But I've made my feelings as clear as I wish to do and that's it for
> now. There's no one else in this discussion and it's grown too, too
> tedious.
>
> Bye, Joe.
> P.S. Please don't write something that will make me want to jump into
> this conversation again.
> Dee Dee


By the way, it might interest you to know that marijuana was originally made
illegal because racists in the American government believed it caused black
men to attack white people. Some science, eh? You should read more. Or some.

On Thu, 12 Jul 2007 10:07:50 -0500, Pan Ohco > wrote:

>On Wed, 11 Jul 2007 20:12:13 -0400, "Joe Cilinceon"
> wrote:
>
>
>>or life as a three time loser for a few petty theft charges
>That is for three violent crimes
>
Among the nearly 7,000 California inmates who are serving life terms
under the law, 331 are there for a third strike that was a petty
theft, according to the California Department of Corrections. An
additional 603 were charged with a third strike for drug possession.

<http://www.streetgangs.com/topics/2002/040202supreme.html>

sorry, i don't know their names. and that's just in california.

>> We have a notion that
>>regardless of what you did and why you may have done it you broke the law
>>and have to pay the fullest penalty.
>Yes that penalty is a bitch. Its called personal responsibility.
>
>>Joe

personal responsibility is a bitch, too.

your pal,
scooter

On Wed, 11 Jul 2007 17:50:30 -0700, "Dave Bugg" >
wrote:

>JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
>> "Dave Bugg" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
>>>> "Dave Bugg" > wrote in message
>>>> ...
>>>>> JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
>>>>>> "Dave Bugg" > wrote in message
>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>> JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> His point, which you pretended not to notice, is that we
>>>>>>>> imprison people for ***SOME*** things which are absurd, like
>>>>>>>> possessing enough cocaine for one person, not a party.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Is is against the law to posses any amount of illegal narcotic or
>>>>>>> not?
>>>>>>>> We act as if we're protecting
>>>>>>>> people by arresting them, but meanwhile, if you drink enough,
>>>>>>>> you can wreck your liver, which makes you more susceptible to
>>>>>>>> liver cancer. Who gets arrested for possession of booze?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Is it illegal to possess booze?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Change the laws, or obey them.
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Dave
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I figured you'd get to that.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What if your elected slobs made it illegal to go more than 11
>>>>>> miles per hour in your car? Would you obey that law? It's as
>>>>>> stupid as keeping drugs illegal. You may notice that the elected
>>>>>> slobs rarely mention doing anything to change these stupid laws.
>>>>>
>>>>> All sorts of ludicrous premises can be put forward. Fiction is a
>>>>> respite for those with no logical argument. My point stands: change
>>>>> the law or live with it. You can also commit to civil disobedience,
>>>>> and accept the consequence.
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Dave
>>>>
>>>> You cannot change the drug laws without risking your life. Two major
>>>> categories of people are enriched by keeping them illegal. That why
>>>> *I* believe we rarely, if ever hear our elected slobs mention the
>>>> idea, except around election time. What is your theory to explain
>>>> why our elected slobs won't touch these laws?
>>>
>>> I agree with the laws, so they don't concern me. If you disagree with
>>> them, get them changed.
>>>
>>>> Another question: Does it bother you that drugs are illegal? Do you
>>>> find anything wrong with it?
>>>
>>> Answered above.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Dave
>>
>> OK. Do you feel that cocaine or heroin are more dangerous than
>> alcohol? If yes, explain why, or provide links. Or, if you don't want
>> to put much effort into this, just tell me who told you to say one
>> drug was more dangerous than another.
>
>So, you've evolved this discussion from the climate of imprisonment in
>America, to laws that you disagree with, to the justification of allowing
>drug usage.
>
>Nice try. People commit crimes, including drug possession which is illegal.
>People get jailed when caught for committing crime. People have the choice
>to obey the law or not. If you disagree with the law change it.

many people commit crimes, including drug possession and go to jail.
many people commit crimes, including drug possession and don't go to
jail. a much larger percentage of the former are black than the
percentage of the latter who are black. what's wrong with this
picture?

your pal,
blake

blake murphy wrote:

> On Wed, 11 Jul 2007 17:50:30 -0700, "Dave Bugg" >
> wrote:

>> Nice try. People commit crimes, including drug possession which is
>> illegal. People get jailed when caught for committing crime. People
>> have the choice to obey the law or not. If you disagree with the law
>> change it.
>
> many people commit crimes, including drug possession and go to jail.
> many people commit crimes, including drug possession and don't go to
> jail. a much larger percentage of the former are black than the
> percentage of the latter who are black. what's wrong with this
> picture?

All of them should be sent to Joe Arpia's (sp) jail in Arizona, that's
what's wrong.

--
Dave
www.davebbq.com

On Wed, 11 Jul 2007 17:37:19 -0700, "Dave Bugg" >
wrote:

>Joe Cilinceon wrote:
>> "Dave Bugg" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
>>>
>>>> His point, which you pretended not to notice, is that we imprison
>>>> people for ***SOME*** things which are absurd, like possessing
>>>> enough cocaine for one person, not a party.
>>>
>>> Is is against the law to posses any amount of illegal narcotic or
>>> not?
>>>> We act as if we're protecting
>>>> people by arresting them, but meanwhile, if you drink enough, you
>>>> can wreck your liver, which makes you more susceptible to liver
>>>> cancer. Who gets arrested for possession of booze?
>>>
>>> Is it illegal to possess booze?
>>>
>>> Change the laws, or obey them.
>>> --
>>> Dave
>>> www.davebbq.com
>>>
>>
>> The point is we have some stupid, poorly thought out laws on our
>> books in this country. They are not based on protecting the general
>> population from each other and keeping an orderly society but
>> protecting us from ourselves. If a cop followed the average driver
>> for 1 mile he could write him with several tickets easily. One of
>> which could get you jail time. If you enjoy it odds are it is illegal
>> somewhere in this country.
>
>That is not the same as stating that America loves to imprison people. The
>great thing about America is that you can work to change laws that your
>disagree with.
>
>Again, ludicrous examples are the fiction of the desperate.

as of 2004:

According to the International Centre for Prison Studies at King's
College London, the U.S. currently has the largest documented prison
population in the world, both in absolute and proportional terms.
We've got roughly 2.03 million people behind bars, or 701 per 100,000
population. China has the second-largest number of prisoners (1.51
million, for a rate of 117 per 100,000), and Russia has the
second-highest rate (606 per 100,000, for a total of 865,000). Russia
had the highest rate for years, but has released hundreds of thousands
of prisoners since 1998; meanwhile the U.S. prison population has
grown by even more. Rounding out the top ten, with rates from 554 to
437, are Belarus, Bermuda (UK), Kazakhstan, the Virgin Islands (U.S.),
the Cayman Islands (UK), Turkmenistan, Belize, and Suriname, which
you'll have to agree puts America in interesting company. South
Africa, a longtime star performer on the list, has dropped to 15th
place (402) since the dismantling of apartheid.

<http://www.straightdope.com/columns/040206.html>

what does this mean? that americans are more criminal than the rest
of the world. (i suppose you could argue that's a benefit of freedom,
but i wouldn't) or does it mean that americans like to imprison
people?

your pal,
blake

blake murphy wrote:

Snip the self-serving crap....

> what does this mean? that americans are more criminal than the rest
> of the world. (i suppose you could argue that's a benefit of freedom,
> but i wouldn't) or does it mean that americans like to imprison
> people?

It means that America punishes criminals.
--
Dave
www.davebbq.com

On Thu, 12 Jul 2007 09:53:55 -0500, Pan Ohco > wrote:

>On Wed, 11 Jul 2007 12:50:58 -0400, "Joe Cilinceon"
> wrote:
>
>
>>
>>Economically it is cheaper to put a person in jail for life with no parole
>>than put them to death. The average annual operating cost per inmate in the
>>US is $22650. It can be as high as $30000 to as low as $14500 depending on
>>the state. The average cost to put a person to death in California is about
>>$250 Million per execution which is pretty close to a national average. The
>>cost to house the prisoner is about the same but the legal fees involved are
>>much higher due to the automatic appeal system.
>>
>>Numbers for the Department of Prisons.
>
>And on top of that death is easy.
>They should be put in general population.
>They will find out what it means to be victimized.

you're all heart, joe. should the anal rapists be federal employees
or should it be outsourced?

your pal,
blake

On Thu, 12 Jul 2007 04:33:20 GMT, Blair P. Houghton > wrote:

>Nancy Young > wrote:
>>
>>"Blair P. Houghton" > wrote
>>
>>> Nancy Young > wrote:
>>>>Yikes. Guess that'll teach him.
>>>
>>> BTW, they didn't execute him.
>>>
>>> They sentenced him to die, but the execution isn't
>>> scheduled to be carried out for two years, and by then it
>>> will probably be reduced to life imprisonment.
>>
>>The article said they executed him Tuesday.
>
>Yer. I'd got my information earlier from a few seconds
>of comment by some talking head on CNN. Turns out CNN
>was full of cacapoopoo or confusing one story for another
>in the middle.
>
> --Blair

see, there's your problem. watch fox news and you can be sure they'll
have it wrong from the start.

your pal,
bill

On Wed, 11 Jul 2007 19:19:37 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
> wrote:

>"blake murphy" > wrote in message
.. .
>> On Wed, 11 Jul 2007 09:08:47 -0500, Omelet >
>> wrote:
>>
>>>In article >,
>>> "JoeSpareBedroom" > wrote:
>>>
>>>> "Peter" > wrote in message
>>>> news:jQSki.27843$tB5.10552@edtnps90...
>>>> >
>>>> > "JoeSpareBedroom" > wrote in message
>>>> > ...
>>>> >> "Phil Evans" > wrote in message
>>>> >> ...
>>>> >>>I believe its called premeditated murder if you plan it, so yes,
>>>> >>> under the present law there is a huge difference.
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> Even so, I am not passing judgement on this one.
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>
>>>> >> If you stop a killing, it *usually* will not be considered murder of
>>>> >> any
>>>> >> kind, unless you're in one of the weird states.
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > You are willing to let a loved one to be murdered in the name of your
>>>> > government because they prevented a murder of someone else and were
>>>> > charged by murder themselves?
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>> WHAT?? :-)
>>>>
>>>> Let's start over, so you understand where I'm coming from here. If
>>>> someone
>>>> enters my home at 3:00 AM and my son is here, I will assume (correctly)
>>>> that
>>>> they intend to harm us, and I will kill them instantly. There will be no
>>>> discussion, no warning, nothing. Just a simple process. When the cops
>>>> are
>>>> done with their questions and paperwork, I will have an early breakfast
>>>> and
>>>> continue as if nothing happened. Good ammo costs about 75 cents per
>>>> round.
>>>> I'm a generous guy, and it would be rude not to share.
>>>>
>>>> Now we can continue. What was your question?
>>>
>>>Interestingly enough, that is what is recommended. Intruders into your
>>>home to be shot on sight if you are SURE that it's a stranger that does
>>>not belong there.
>>>
>>>No warning.
>>>
>>>You do, of course, realize that unless you are one helluva good shot,
>>>there is no guarantee of a one shot kill.
>>>
>>>I have a shotgun loaded with buckshot, but still...
>>>
>>>I think the thing that bothers me is that many seem to worry more about
>>>the rights of the criminal versus the rights of their victims. It's ok
>>>for them to kill their victims, but we have to let them live?
>>>
>>><sigh>
>>
>> sure, why not be a killer, too? it's so fun and e-z.
>>
>> what bothers me is the evident relish some people take in blowing some
>> theoretical intruder's head off. 'yeah! i'm a ****ing tough guy!
>> don't mess with me!' it just strikes me as childish.
>>
>> your pal,
>> blake
>
>I don't relish the idea any more than I look forward to cleaning the toilet
>or the BBQ grill. It's just something that needs to be done.
>

killing intruders is a routine maintenance chore? perhaps you should
move.

your pal,
blake