True or false: any personal freedom that brings harm to society in general should...

[Katzndogz]

Sometimes it is difficult for people to admit/see that certain personal freedoms cause societal harm. Legalizing all drugs for instance, would be very detrimental to society.

Using force against people causes more harm to society. The drug addict causes harm to himself end becomes a burden on his family, but when his habit becomes illegal he resorts to stealing and robbing thereby harming hundreds of people. When he in incarcerated, he becomes a burden on the taxpayers.

The idea that the government can solve social problems by making them illegal is fallacious.

The way to solve social problems is with a social solution. It's called experiencing the consequence of one's own actions. Remove the protections for drug addicts and most of the problems will disappear on their own. Let families throw drug addict children in the streets, deny welfare to those who lost jobs due to addiction. Stop rehab. Stop tax funded medical care. Declaring an act illegal, then rewarding the illegal act doesn't solve the problem but makes it worse. When addicts harm others, they should be met with any degree of force the victim prefers with absolutely no penalty whatsoever to the successful victim.

 

[PoliticalChic]

You simply cannot refrain from being the least intelligent poster on this forum can you?

Why is that?

Changing Colors: Purple House Owner Decides To Comply With Lubbock City Ordinance - KCBD NewsChannel 11 Lubbock

There's one of many examples.

Tell me how many examples you would need to admit you're an idiot and I'll see if I can accommodate you.

"You simply cannot refrain from being the least intelligent poster on this forum can you?
Why is that?"


You simply cannot refrain from having the most trite, unimaginative, jejune insults, can you?

I'm gonna guess it's related to your IQ, and lack in that precinct.


Has that been mentioned to you previously?

You don't like zoning ordinances. The people VOLUNTARILY moved into an area knowing what the zoning ordinance was. They agreed to abide by the zoning. Then they decided they didn't want to do that. What really makes you so stupid? Is it genetic or what.

I don't believe that this is the post to which you intended to reply....

 

[tjvh]

...be outlawed.

True.

True or False....both.

For example, smoking is a personal freedom. Each person has a right to smoke if they wish too. That in itself causes no harm to society beyond increased healthcare costs which can be handled in ways other than outlawing it.

On the other hand smoking in public places or work places does cause harm to others and an individual has no right to impose his or her personal freedom on another in a way that is harmful so that should be outlawed.

That's my opinion

Smoking is pretty much banned in most all workplaces. Now if you're saying you have a problem with someone smoking outside, then a smoker should have the Right to make the same argument about the exhaust from your lawn mower.

 

[Katzndogz]

Classic fearmonger argument, that totally ignores history and reality.

Meth would be practically wiped out overnight and strong concentrations of cocaine would be the exception rather than the norm....The analog would be beer and wine sales, which far outstrip those of hard liquor and occupy far and away more shelf space than distilled spirits.

Fact is that most people just want to tie a little buzz on, rather than get inebriated.

There would always be a demand for meth.

Get a little buzz on? People shoot for a buzz because of how difficult it is in general to afford hard drugs. For a lot of people the initial intention to experiment would easily turn into a total addiction.

Are you unaware of prohibition and the crime syndicates that it spawned. Do we have that today? No, not with alcohol. Yes, with drugs. Treat drugs like alcohol and you'll get the same results.

Alcoholics seldom eat the faces off their victims. I've never heard of one who did. Drug addicts, not so much. Their attacks are becoming somewhat frequent.

 

[kwc57]

There would always be a demand for meth.

Get a little buzz on? People shoot for a buzz because of how difficult it is in general to afford hard drugs. For a lot of people the initial intention to experiment would easily turn into a total addiction.

Are you unaware of prohibition and the crime syndicates that it spawned. Do we have that today? No, not with alcohol. Yes, with drugs. Treat drugs like alcohol and you'll get the same results.

Alcoholics seldom eat the faces off their victims. I've never heard of one who did. Drug addicts, not so much. Their attacks are becoming somewhat frequent.

Yeah, with bath salt users. Know any pot smokers or cocaine junkies who eat people's faces? Back in prohbition, people died from bathtub gin. Now that alcohol is regulated and readily available, do you hear of that happening. Keep people from having what they want, and they will find ways to get it......or something like it by any means necessary, even if there is a risk it might harm them. Do we have alcoholics today? Sure. A whole nation of them? No. do we have gangs that smuggle booze? No. It gets delivered to stores in delivery trucks. Follow the alcohol model with drugs and you'll see the current drug related problems disappear just like it did when prohibition ended.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Sometimes it is difficult for people to admit/see that certain personal freedoms cause societal harm.

-Simple ownership/possession of a firearm - any kind of firearm - harms no one.
-Simple ownership/possession of a firearm - any kind of firearm - places no one in a condition of clear, present and immediate danger.

Was there anything else?

 

[Oddball]

There would always be a demand for meth.

Get a little buzz on? People shoot for a buzz because of how difficult it is in general to afford hard drugs. For a lot of people the initial intention to experiment would easily turn into a total addiction.

Are you unaware of prohibition and the crime syndicates that it spawned. Do we have that today? No, not with alcohol. Yes, with drugs. Treat drugs like alcohol and you'll get the same results.

Alcoholics seldom eat the faces off their victims. I've never heard of one who did. Drug addicts, not so much. Their attacks are becoming somewhat frequent.

Bath salts....Another drug that quite likely wouldn't exist without prohibition.

I believe someone was sputtering about "harm to society"?

 

[Oddball]

Sometimes it is difficult for people to admit/see that certain personal freedoms cause societal harm. Legalizing all drugs for instance, would be very detrimental to society.

Using force against people causes more harm to society. The drug addict causes harm to himself end becomes a burden on his family, but when his habit becomes illegal he resorts to stealing and robbing thereby harming hundreds of people. When he in incarcerated, he becomes a burden on the taxpayers.

The idea that the government can solve social problems by making them illegal is fallacious.

The way to solve social problems is with a social solution. It's called experiencing the consequence of one's own actions. Remove the protections for drug addicts and most of the problems will disappear on their own. Let families throw drug addict children in the streets, deny welfare to those who lost jobs due to addiction. Stop rehab. Stop tax funded medical care. Declaring an act illegal, then rewarding the illegal act doesn't solve the problem but makes it worse. When addicts harm others, they should be met with any degree of force the victim prefers with absolutely no penalty whatsoever to the successful victim.

Aren't the consequences of drug use/abuse bad enough on their own?

 

[nodoginnafight]

You simply cannot refrain from being the least intelligent poster on this forum can you?

Why is that?

Changing Colors: Purple House Owner Decides To Comply With Lubbock City Ordinance - KCBD NewsChannel 11 Lubbock

There's one of many examples.

Tell me how many examples you would need to admit you're an idiot and I'll see if I can accommodate you.

"You simply cannot refrain from being the least intelligent poster on this forum can you?
Why is that?"


You simply cannot refrain from having the most trite, unimaginative, jejune insults, can you?

I'm gonna guess it's related to your IQ, and lack in that precinct.


Has that been mentioned to you previously?

You don't like zoning ordinances. The people VOLUNTARILY moved into an area knowing what the zoning ordinance was. They agreed to abide by the zoning. Then they decided they didn't want to do that. What really makes you so stupid? Is it genetic or what.

So it this your way of admitting that your previous post (not laws - homeowners association covenants...) was 100% wrong? You just move the goalposts, start arguing a different point, and claim the other guy is ignorant.

How very dishonest of you.

 

[nodoginnafight]

Sometimes it is difficult for people to admit/see that certain personal freedoms cause societal harm.

-Simple ownership/possession of a firearm - any kind of firearm - harms no one.
-Simple ownership/possession of a firearm - any kind of firearm - places no one in a condition of clear, present and immediate danger.

Was there anything else?

As long as that gunowner takes reasonable steps to secure that weapon, I agree.

 

[Darkwind]

...be outlawed.

True.

Your position and questionable actions regarding the swaying of public opinion is causing harm to the public.

You need to be arrested and deported for being a menace to the public safety.

 

[nodoginnafight]

...be outlawed.

True.

True or False....both.

For example, smoking is a personal freedom. Each person has a right to smoke if they wish too. That in itself causes no harm to society beyond increased healthcare costs which can be handled in ways other than outlawing it.

On the other hand smoking in public places or work places does cause harm to others and an individual has no right to impose his or her personal freedom on another in a way that is harmful so that should be outlawed.

That's my opinion

And these principles hold true for a myriad of other actions as well. People who demand a simple cookie-cutter, yes or no answer are going to be disappointed.

 

[FA_Q2]

Were there no power to be sold, the eeeeevil corporations wouldn't be buying it.

Precisely my point. So you agree we need to get money out of politics, and that bought and paid for legislation like Citizens United should be repealed?

Government was at one time a buffer to protect the whole of the American people from exploitation of the private sector. Now it is a tool of corporations and nothing more.

You failed to grasp that concept. A little hint, citizens united had nothing to do with the ability to sell power to companies. That power existed before the ruling and exists after. In order to solve this little problem, you need to attack the source – the ability to sell power in the first place. Until you address that, there is no amount of campaign finance reform that will amount to squat. As long as the incentive is there, it will be utilized.

Now, to the OP;
Out and out false. As others haves stated, society is amorphous. Who can tell what hurts or helps it. Beyond that, even when you come to a clear conclusion, it still does not matter. Personal freedoms trump a vaunted societal benefit any day. What freedoms are limited is a matter of impacting the freedoms of others, not an imaginary harm to society.

Case in point, the most secure and safe society is that of despotism. That form of government by far exudes the highest level of safety and security. In that type of government, we could eliminate obesity, drive down all crime rates and make a safer society. It is not worth it, however, as freedom is very important. I do not want the ‘best’ society. Instead, I want to be left the fuck alone to create my own slice of ‘best.’

 

[Oddball]

Sometimes it is difficult for people to admit/see that certain personal freedoms cause societal harm.

-Simple ownership/possession of a firearm - any kind of firearm - harms no one.
-Simple ownership/possession of a firearm - any kind of firearm - places no one in a condition of clear, present and immediate danger.

Was there anything else?

As long as that gunowner takes reasonable steps to secure that weapon, I agree.

"Reasonable" as determined how and by whom?

 

[NYcarbineer]

The government can't fine you. The homeowner voluntarily enters into an association where they agree in advance what color to paint their house. This has nothing to do with the government. If you don't like it, don't buy your house there.

You simply cannot refrain from being the least intelligent poster on this forum can you?

Why is that?

Changing Colors: Purple House Owner Decides To Comply With Lubbock City Ordinance - KCBD NewsChannel 11 Lubbock

There's one of many examples.

Tell me how many examples you would need to admit you're an idiot and I'll see if I can accommodate you.

"You simply cannot refrain from being the least intelligent poster on this forum can you?
Why is that?"


You simply cannot refrain from having the most trite, unimaginative, jejune insults, can you?

I'm gonna guess it's related to your IQ, and lack in that precinct.


Has that been mentioned to you previously?

The irony of your post, not to mention your unawareness of the irony, is simply delightful.

 

[Oddball]

You simply cannot refrain from being the least intelligent poster on this forum can you?

Why is that?

Changing Colors: Purple House Owner Decides To Comply With Lubbock City Ordinance - KCBD NewsChannel 11 Lubbock

There's one of many examples.

Tell me how many examples you would need to admit you're an idiot and I'll see if I can accommodate you.

"You simply cannot refrain from being the least intelligent poster on this forum can you?
Why is that?"


You simply cannot refrain from having the most trite, unimaginative, jejune insults, can you?

I'm gonna guess it's related to your IQ, and lack in that precinct.


Has that been mentioned to you previously?

The irony of your post, not to mention your unawareness of the irony, is simply delightful.

Speaking of unawareness of one's own ironic commentaries.

 

[Spoonman]

...be outlawed.

True.

if that was the case we would be communist china

 

[nodoginnafight]

-Simple ownership/possession of a firearm - any kind of firearm - harms no one.
-Simple ownership/possession of a firearm - any kind of firearm - places no one in a condition of clear, present and immediate danger.

Was there anything else?

As long as that gunowner takes reasonable steps to secure that weapon, I agree.

"Reasonable" as determined how and by whom?

reasonable as determined in the same way we make these determinations in our participatory form of government. why do you ask?

You think one person's idea of reasonable should trump everyone else's?

 

[NYcarbineer]

So? There are places in the US where they can fine you if don't paint your house the right color.

The government can't fine you. The homeowner voluntarily enters into an association where they agree in advance what color to paint their house. This has nothing to do with the government. If you don't like it, don't buy your house there.

Correct! I live in such a neighborhood. It's why we bought there. It's a beautiful neighborhood with well kept homes and lawns. No boats or travel trailers in the driveway, no weedy unmowed lawns, no cars parked in the street, no carports, no purple houses or metal roofs, etc. If someone doesn't want to live in a neighborhood with an association covenant and pay dues, there are thousands upon thousands of available houses all over the city with cars parked in the street that you ahve to weave thru and gaudy eyesores you have to look at when you go outside. Freedom of association is a wonderful thing.

Not correct, as I already posted, you illiterate mutant.

 

[NYcarbineer]

"You simply cannot refrain from being the least intelligent poster on this forum can you?
Why is that?"


You simply cannot refrain from having the most trite, unimaginative, jejune insults, can you?

I'm gonna guess it's related to your IQ, and lack in that precinct.


Has that been mentioned to you previously?

The irony of your post, not to mention your unawareness of the irony, is simply delightful.

Speaking of unawareness of one's own ironic commentaries.

Name them you gutless fuck.