Critical race theory and elections

#302
#302
utvols88 said:
Partially lol. Do you have any qualms with crack being enforced harsher than cocaine?
Click to expand...

I have a problem with most of the war on drugs, and yes, specifically this sort of aspect of it where the poor are treated more harshly by the CJS. It's absolute dogshit and it's bad government at its finest.

You really did have alot of confidence in it. Sheesh. Tough scene.
Click to expand...

Confidence in what?
 
#303
#303
hog88 said:
It was a bad analogy, sorry.
Click to expand...

You clearly didn't get it at first because your focus was too narrow. You're doubling down now because you feel silly. Whether or not something is "bought" has nothing to do with the parallels being drawn, but hang onto that deflection tightly, bro.
 
#306
#306
n_huffhines said:
I have a problem with most of the war on drugs, and yes, specifically this sort of aspect of it where the poor are treated more harshly by the CJS. It's absolute dogshit and it's bad government at its finest.



Confidence in what?
Click to expand...
Your analogy had zero mention regarding the war on drugs. That's your example you pulled out of your ass. Your analogy specifically mentions racism and in a broad way. It specifically mentions lack of ACCESS and accommodations toward a group of people when the black American is specifically lifted through legislation to the detriment of others. It's a privileged take because there are accommodations. There is access with the infrastructure of the hotel (laws). So to imply such does not exist is asinine. Perhaps the analogy is applicable decades ago. Not now.

The war on drugs had nothing to do with authors analogy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rickyvol77
#309
#309
utvols88 said:
Your analogy had zero mention regarding the war on drugs. That's your example you pulled out of your ass. Your analogy specifically mentions racism and in a broad way. It specifically mentions lack of ACCESS and accommodations toward a group of people when the black American is specifically lifted through legislation to the detriment of others. It's a privileged take because there are accommodations. There is access with the infrastructure of the hotel (laws). So to imply such does not exist is asinine. Perhaps the analogy is applicable decades ago. Not now.

The war on drugs had nothing to do with authors analogy.
Click to expand...

It's explaining rules designed within a construct based on discrimination.

Me: Jesus is the bread of life.

You guys: he's not even food!
 
#311
#311
n_huffhines said:
It's explaining rules designed within a construct based on discrimination.

Me: Jesus is the bread of life.

You guys: he's not even food!
Click to expand...

Me : but Jesus I was addicted to ( insert addition here ) and it wasn’t fair because of my skin color .

Jesus : Didn’t you have the same choices everyone else had ?
 
  • Like
Reactions: InVOLuntary and Rickyvol77
#313
#313
hog88 said:
If employers were allowed to maintain drug free policies I doubt we would see much of an increase in use. Face it, few people don't use because it's illegal.
Click to expand...
It was a poor attempt at humor. Most people with any sense do not use crack or cocaine because they value their lives & well-being. The people I have met that choose to use cocaine aren’t very intelligent imo.
 
#314
#314
PEPPERJAX said:
It was a poor attempt at humor. Most people with any sense do not use crack or cocaine because they value their lives & well-being. The people I have met that choose to use cocaine aren’t very intelligent imo.
Click to expand...

I've met some pretty intelligent and successful people use snort occasionally.
 
#319
#319
hog88 said:
It doesn't seem to hurt them professionally. Besides, WTF do I care? It's their life.
Click to expand...
Because as we have discussed before, it's their effects on OTHER's lives that is the issue.

I couldn't care less if someone shoots up, smokes crack or meth, smokes bongs all day long or takes LSD or Shrooms in their homes, even if they die doing it.

But that's not what the vast majority of drug addicts do, they are always high, are a danger to others while out in public walking or driving or at the store or lots of places, and they cause other crime to go up as well due to their actions to support their needs (i.e. robbery, shootings, assaults, DUIs, etc.)

And that's not even discussing the societal effects on healthcare and Emergency responder costs, neighborhood values, messing up children lives, etc.
 
  • Like
Reactions: InVOLuntary, W.TN.Orange Blood and AshG
#320
#320
Rickyvol77 said:
Because as we have discussed before, it's their affects on OTHER's lives that is the issue.

I could care less if someone shoots up, smokes crack or meth, smokes bongs all day long or takes LSD or Shrooms in their homes, even if they die doing it.

But that's not what the vast majority of drug addicts do, they are always high, are a danger to others while out in public walking or driving or at the store or lots of places, and they cause other crime to go up as well due to their actions to support their needs (i.e. robbery, shootings, assaults, DUIs, etc.)

And that's not even discussing the societal effects on healthcare and Emergency responder costs, neighborhood values, messing up children lives, etc.
Click to expand...

I wish we could remove the research moratoriums leading to medicinal use. There has been some anecdotal information that a single hyperdose of LSD administered in a clinical environment helps rewire the brains of people with PTSD and chronic generalized pain, both of which I live with. I live in a medical marijuana state now, so my phantom pain is under control without any of the side effects of gabapentin. If I move for a new job to a state without medical permissions, I will have to live with the pain as I do not tolerate gabapentin and I will not violate the law of the state I live in regarding procurement and usage.

It's a delicate dance, prohibition laws and medical research. One should not exacerbate the other.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rickyvol77 and RikidyBones
#321
#321
AshG said:
I wish we could remove the research moratoriums leading to medicinal use. There has been some anecdotal information that a single hyperdose of LSD administered in a clinical environment helps rewire the brains of people with PTSD and chronic generalized pain, both of which I live with. I live in a medical marijuana state now, so my phantom pain is under control without any of the side effects of gabapentin. If I move for a new job to a state without medical permissions, I will have to live with the pain as I do not tolerate gabapentin and I will not violate the law of the state I live in regarding procurement and usage.

It's a delicate dance, prohibition laws and medical research. One should not exacerbate the other.
Click to expand...

You (and others) may find this interesting.

Research - MAPS
 
#322
#322
Rickyvol77 said:
Because as we have discussed before, it's their effects on OTHER's lives that is the issue.

I couldn't care less if someone shoots up, smokes crack or meth, smokes bongs all day long or takes LSD or Shrooms in their homes, even if they die doing it.

But that's not what the vast majority of drug addicts do, they are always high, are a danger to others while out in public walking or driving or at the store or lots of places, and they cause other crime to go up as well due to their actions to support their needs (i.e. robbery, shootings, assaults, DUIs, etc.)

And that's not even discussing the societal effects on healthcare and Emergency responder costs, neighborhood values, messing up children lives, etc.
Click to expand...

And none of that would increase if drugs were legal. Alcoholism didn't increase with the end of prohibition.
 
#323
#323
AshG said:
I record my lectures. If you need help getting to sleep, I'll be glad to send you a couple.
Click to expand...
No, because you knew you were being recorded. It is what you say when the lights are off that is useful.
 
#324
#324
PEPPERJAX said:
It was a poor attempt at humor. Most people with any sense do not use crack or cocaine because they value their lives & well-being. The people I have met that choose to use cocaine aren’t very intelligent imo.
Click to expand...

Interesting. I have known some pretty gifted people that use drugs. I have known some geniuses that were full blown addicts.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PEPPERJAX
#325
#325
SpaceCoastVol said:
No, because you knew you were being recorded. It is what you say when the lights are off that is useful.
Click to expand...

I'm always being recorded when I teach. I'm addicted to self-reflection.

I also live in abject fear of having anything I say or do be used against me by an angry student, so when I'm not recorded I still act like I am.

This is literally the only place I let my hair down at all.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top