Don't have an account yet? You can create one. As a registered user you have some advantages like theme manager, comments configuration and post comments with your name.
Online
1570 guest(s) and 0 member(s)
You are Anonymous user. You can register for free by clicking here
VideoGamesSuck.com :: View topic - ISLAM & JUDAISM
I do not see any reason why anyone would resort to drinking alcohol that's correct. But of course you do, so explain it to me then. Oh, sorry, you're lazy, forget it.
just like you do not see any reason why people drink it is also equally possible, there may be other who see no reason why peddlers shouldnt be amputated and thrown in a garbage compactors with mixture of corrosive acid and televised live prime time.
Last edited by _Master_ on Sat May 01, 2010 12:58 pm, edited 1 time in total _________________ follow me or get out of the way
Posted: Sat May 01, 2010 12:56 pm
_Master_
A Winner is me!
Joined: Jun 18, 2009
Posts: 1711
First I quote you on your 2 remarks
berzerker wrote:
If you are trying to say that capital punishment in itself is a sign that it is a backward country, then I agree BTW.
you imply capital punishment is backward
you again reinforce it below
berzerker wrote:
_Master_ wrote:
perhaps when it is your close ones that get raped or murdered by a psyco, then perhaps it may hit you hard that capital punishment seems a possible solution.
Stoning is also a possible solution but a backward solution, like capital punishment, so what's your point?
again I can safely assume according to you capital punishment is backward, in other words you don’t want to punish the a psychopath as it is directly evident from your reply above since it is very backward. Ok now let us look closely at your hypocritical stmt below
berzerker wrote:
_Master_ wrote:
The victim said he was a menace to society.
This is a very clear example where criminals and wrongdoers needs to be. ie inside the jail and not outside in the society fucking you in ass as you would prefer.
Dangerous psychopaths needs to be taken out of society as long as they are dangerous, that is not in dispute, so what's your point?
Suddenly you did a Houdini (which I am sure mandrake would appreciate very much). It’s a clear 180degress gymnastics turn by your comment in the quote above. I am curious to know the extremely clear rational logic of yours which make you refute your own self claim of “capital punishment being backward”, but suddenly accepts “Dangerous psychopaths needs to be taken out of society”.
I can only speculate that all this while you where under the influence under some potent drugs, I sincerely hope that is not the case as I would like to hear what you have to say. I could wait for a few days until the effects of the drug wears off from your blood stream.
_________________ follow me or get out of the way
Posted: Sat May 01, 2010 12:57 pm
_Master_
A Winner is me!
Joined: Jun 18, 2009
Posts: 1711
puk wrote:
The argument started when Master claimed all drug dealers should be shot. The counter argument was "Why should we not also shoot alcohol vendors and car dealerships". The logic behind this is that cars and alcohol kill far more people than drugs.
this is not a logical comparison by any means even by a long shot. Again you are taking deaths, not number of people affected by drugs and their inability to functions as normal persons in the society. Your comparison of “alcohol vendors and car dealerships” has had me stunned, there is no upper bound to the level of stupidity humans can achieve, I give you that with ease.
Unlike bezerker I do wanna stop crime and not let some1 stick a knife in me or rob me and get away with it. So if a crime is committed, a mechanism must be in place to swiftly take action as to deter such crimes from occurring in the future by a significant margin.
A drug dealer gets his stuff from illegal channels, which is drug money. This obviously comes from drug lords across the borders thru some illegal channels. These drug lords are hardcore criminals ( I donot have proof puk, but please try to mess with them and if you live to tell a tale please we would very much like to hear about it), merciless. Nevertheless it is illegal business to sell banned drugs. Even if the process was legal there would still be some looser in the back alley selling it.
Alcohol is something that is brewed legally and transported thru an established supply chain vis warehouses. its business is legal. Similar scenario for cars too.
So then your question “Why should we not also shoot alcohol vendors and car dealerships" is then naively simple because those are legitimate business. Whereas the other procured thru illegal channels are not. Second it is manufactured in an industry rather thru regulated policies of the govt and can be held accountable. Eg if you died of alcohol poisoning or found a rat in your beer can you can sue. Likewise you can do the same within a reasonable time frame from a cardealer too(but I admit some of these dealers are real assholes after its sold) . No such mechanism exists for drugs.
So by awarding punishments to dealers, you can control the illegal profits that the drug baron is enjoying. Not only that you reduce gang and drug related violence which is a problem, because they fight among themselves for territorial footholds for distribution. You are infact sending a direct message back to the hard to catch baron.
Before you have a knee jerk reaction and come with more half baked replies, I would suggest to read my replies closely and think as much as you can with your brains and come back with a sensible reply.
Last edited by _Master_ on Sat May 01, 2010 1:19 pm, edited 1 time in total _________________ follow me or get out of the way
Posted: Sat May 01, 2010 12:58 pm
_Master_
A Winner is me!
Joined: Jun 18, 2009
Posts: 1711
berzerker wrote:
_Master_ wrote:
again you provide some stupid link and try to fit the link based on your petty stupid immature logic. Netherlands gets its revenue from tourism, tourists who go there to do drugs and sex.
Speaking about stereotypes! Most tourists come to the Netherlands for the beach and flowers and such. BTW it is not a country for which tourism is vital, like Spain or Turkey.
you are wrong again. "Accounting for 38 percent, the hotel and restaurant sector accounted for the lion’s share of Dutch tourist spending".
berzerker wrote:
BTW it is not a country for which tourism is vital, like Spain or Turkey.
thats incorrect again, tourism is vital in Netherlands too.
"Spending on tourist goods and services is very sensitive to the economy. The economic recession in the first years of the millennium went hand in hand with a decrease in tourist consumption after 2001"
"Spending on tourist goods and services is very sensitive to the economy. The economic recession in the first years of the millennium went hand in hand with a decrease in tourist consumption after 2001"
"The contribution of tourism to the total gross domestic product (GDP) rose to 3.2 percent, the same as in 2001"
Lets compare this for a country like Thailand which is totally reliant on tourism
"Tourism is a major economic factor in the Kingdom of Thailand, contributing an estimated 6.7% to Thailand's GDP in 2007"
bit dated to 2000, but you can only expect it to increase
_________________ follow me or get out of the way
Posted: Sat May 01, 2010 12:59 pm
_Master_
A Winner is me!
Joined: Jun 18, 2009
Posts: 1711
Alez wrote:
I'm not sure: what do you think is the fundamental difference with prohibiting the use of drugs? It's regulating behavior. I do not see why it would be a fundamental human right to drive a car.
same xeroxed fucked up logic quoted by puk. atleast come up with something original. in the meanwhile you can drive the donkey cart in Romania without any issues, I don’t know if you may need a license.
Alez wrote:
Typically short-sighted american thinking: their freedoms are fundamental while other countries freedoms are insignificant. Master shows the same signs. The 'not invented here' syndome I guess.
yet it is people like you who are the first in q at the embassies to apply for a visa who bitch about. how ironic!
Alez wrote:
Suislide wrote:
Once your IQ reaches double digits you should only then consider replying to me.
Pure Suislidian!
What's your IQ by the way? Can't be too high I reckon.
as he said you will get that answer "Once your IQ reaches double digits"
_________________ follow me or get out of the way
Posted: Sat May 01, 2010 1:00 pm
_Master_
A Winner is me!
Joined: Jun 18, 2009
Posts: 1711
berzerker wrote:
Alez wrote:
Pure Suislidian!
Yeah, form but no substance.
unlike you he isint into substances to escape realities of life
_________________ follow me or get out of the way
Posted: Sat May 01, 2010 1:20 pm
puk
A Winner is me!
Joined: Jun 23, 2008
Posts: 2140
Location: Southampton, UK
_Master_ wrote:
puk wrote:
Furthermore, your example is anecdotal. If you continue to provide anecdotal evidence, please change your name to Christopher Hitchens =P
I don't think you know what anecdotal means (definition number 2)
Posted: Sat May 01, 2010 1:25 pm
puk
A Winner is me!
Joined: Jun 23, 2008
Posts: 2140
Location: Southampton, UK
_Master_ wrote:
puk wrote:
You took that out of context.
no the context was apt. that was screen pollution.
puk wrote:
You initially talked about killing dealers, not murderers and rapists, first of all.
are you sure? can you provide a link to the place where it was quoted first? Anyways even if I did so what?
This is actually funny b/c if you hadn't been so worried about 'screen pollution', you could have answered your own question
berzerker wrote:
_Master_ wrote:
On the other hand a drug dealer is selling coke and ruining the life of kids who in turn takes to committing other crimes. what should we do to them? let them go free? counseling? or slap a light sentence and let them back into society? what is your solution to this? give me a solution, dont give me wimpy answers that stoning/executions/lifesentence is backward.
You cannot prevent crimes unless maybe you are willing to live in a 1984-like state. In your reasoning why should you not kill every offender / criminal, irrespective of the nature of the crime? For if you don't they could do it again. People make mistakes, and many crimes are pretty harmless / technical. Drugs is a fine example, why are drugs considered evil by the legal system but not alcohol / tobacco? There is no logic in that.
Your witness.
Posted: Sat May 01, 2010 1:30 pm
berzerker
A Winner is me!
Joined: Nov 01, 2006
Posts: 2350
_Master_ wrote:
berzerker wrote:
And if drugs would be freely available, would there still be such damage? It would probably be very cheap in the shops, no need to steal or lie any more.
In that case it should be regulated and purchased from a shop like alcohol where you need to show your id. It would probably be good, as that would remove a sizeable chunk of peddlers from the chain. It still makes it illegal for peddlers to sell drugs. Being an adult yes you are responsible and buy it from any store like jewel osco or wallgreens. But as a teenager you are extremely vulnerable and naive. you have no business to be around those drugs. By awarding brutal punishments to peddlers it would crub the tendency to look for peddling as a source of income. In either case legalized or not the common denominator that harsh punishments be awarded to peddlers still remains constant. The only change is it makes it easier for adults with ids to procure them.
So we agree that legalisation with additional regulations, like with alcohol, would be pretty good solution? Then I do not understand why you made this fuss when I compared drugs and alcohol and you compared (use/sale?) of drugs with murder (mass murder even) instead, we could have spared ourselves the time spent on this discussion.
Sale is no real problem any more of course once it is legalised, no more than illegal sale of booze and tobacco are problems now.
We could still make a distinction between hard drugs (cocaine, heroin etc) of the one hand an soft drugs (marihuana etc on the other), but since the bulk of the users limit their use to soft drugs, the bulk of the problem has been taken away anyway.
Last edited by berzerker on Sat May 01, 2010 1:33 pm, edited 1 time in total
Posted: Sat May 01, 2010 1:32 pm
puk
A Winner is me!
Joined: Jun 23, 2008
Posts: 2140
Location: Southampton, UK
_Master_ wrote:
puk wrote:
It's an imperfect system...
we live in a society where time is short and we need to live a quality life. Some1 did a crime, finish him off and let the state machinery run smoothly. Whts the fucking problem? Or you could adopt a rapist if you so desire and keep it as pet home to showoff to your friends and family.
There are two issues here. One is that of incarcerating people on a threshold model: either not at all, or forever. Second is capital punishment, in this case for all life without parole sentences.
The latter I don't approve of b/c I am against state sanction murder. In the former, I think if something is malum in se (rape, murder, torture) then you need severe penalties. But you need to exercise discretion in other cases. If you throw a drug dealer in jail you are condemning him/her to a life of further crime. Mind you, dealers are not all black. Some are students, parents, children, decent citizens...
Posted: Sat May 01, 2010 1:35 pm
puk
A Winner is me!
Joined: Jun 23, 2008
Posts: 2140
Location: Southampton, UK
I can't keep up with this debate. It's growing faster than I can keep up. In any event, it has nothing to do with demonization of Islam any more.
I'm bowing out.
Posted: Sat May 01, 2010 1:37 pm
berzerker
A Winner is me!
Joined: Nov 01, 2006
Posts: 2350
_Master_ wrote:
berzerker wrote:
Dangerous psychopaths needs to be taken out of society as long as they are dangerous, that is not in dispute, so what's your point?
Suddenly you did a Houdini (which I am sure mandrake would appreciate very much). It’s a clear 180degress gymnastics turn by your comment in the quote above. I am curious to know the extremely clear rational logic of yours which make you refute your own self claim of “capital punishment being backward”, but suddenly accepts “Dangerous psychopaths needs to be taken out of society”.
It did not occur to you that you can remove the danger to society posed by someone in other ways than by killing him? And I wrote as long as they are dangerous for a reason. Many criminals have psychological problems (these psychologist you know will confirm this) and may be curable, and if it isn't, it may disappear over time (elderly are usually much less criminal than younger people) and if neither of these applies you could lock them up for good. I had expected this to be obvious, my mistake.
I don't think you know what anecdotal means (definition number 2)
I don't think you know what anecdotal means (definition number 1)
puk wrote:
You initially talked about killing dealers, not murderers and rapists, first of all.
_Master_ wrote:
are you sure? can you provide a link to the place where it was quoted first? Anyways even if I did so what?
This is actually funny b/c if you hadn't been so worried about 'screen pollution', you could have answered your own question
you have some difficulty in comprehending written text, I said to put the link and not to paste the quotes causing further unnecessary screen pollution. Yeah man that’s so funny are you still laughing?
puk wrote:
_Master_ wrote:
On the other hand a drug dealer is selling coke and ruining the life of kids who in turn takes to committing other crimes. what should we do to them? let them go free? counseling? or slap a light sentence and let them back into society? what is your solution to this? give me a solution, dont give me wimpy answers that stoning/executions/lifesentence is backward.
berzerker wrote:
You cannot prevent crimes unless maybe you are willing to live in a 1984-like state.
Your witness.
thanks. So I did talk about killing dealers, not murderers and rapists first. So whts wrong with that? Did I violate some strange laws in doing so? Or was I supposed to discuss
murderers, rapists, dealers? murderers, dealers, rapists? rapists, murderers, dealers?
rapists, dealers, murderers? Would the change of sequence have made it acceptable?
Anyways you see the same fked up logic of bezerker again “You cannot prevent crimes unless maybe you are willing to live in a 1984-like state.” Always picking extreme singularities to justify his crazy logic. Eg “You cannot avoid bugs in games unless you don’t buy games” so bezerker please do not buy any games all at unless maybe you are willing to live in a 1984-like state
Last edited by _Master_ on Sat May 01, 2010 3:29 pm, edited 1 time in total _________________ follow me or get out of the way
Posted: Sat May 01, 2010 3:23 pm
_Master_
A Winner is me!
Joined: Jun 18, 2009
Posts: 1711
berzerker wrote:
So we agree that legalisation with additional regulations, like with alcohol, would be pretty good solution? Then I do not understand why you made this fuss when I compared drugs and alcohol and you compared (use/sale?) of drugs with murder (mass murder even) instead, we could have spared ourselves the time spent on this discussion.
hold on, if that would make a good solution or not is not my primary concern. You accidentally left the important part of the quote, which is
_ Master _ wrote:
In either case legalized or not the common denominator that harsh punishments be awarded to peddlers still remains constant.
If you are fine with this, we can discuss at a later time leisurely when deemed appropriate about the other pretty good solution.
Last edited by _Master_ on Sat May 01, 2010 3:29 pm, edited 1 time in total _________________ follow me or get out of the way
Posted: Sat May 01, 2010 3:24 pm
_Master_
A Winner is me!
Joined: Jun 18, 2009
Posts: 1711
puk wrote:
_Master_ wrote:
puk wrote:
It's an imperfect system...
we live in a society where time is short and we need to live a quality life. Some1 did a crime, finish him off and let the state machinery run smoothly. Whts the fucking problem? Or you could adopt a rapist if you so desire and keep it as pet home to showoff to your friends and family.
There are two issues here. One is that of incarcerating people on a threshold model: either not at all, or forever. Second is capital punishment, in this case for all life without parole sentences.
threshold model should be very easy to digest because the same threshold is used to classify genocide (killing innocents in mass). So its just another threshold that awards death for bad crimes ( insert dealers..etc and other heinous crimes)
puk wrote:
The latter I don't approve of b/c I am against state sanction murder. In the former, I think if something is malum in se (rape, murder, torture) then you need severe penalties.
like ?
puk wrote:
But you need to exercise discretion in other cases. If you throw a drug dealer in jail you are condemning him/her to a life of further crime.
no jail, swift execution is awarded.
puk wrote:
Mind you, dealers are not all black.
and why are you telling me this? Irrespective of color swift execution is awarded
puk wrote:
Some are students, parents, children, decent citizens...
swift execution is awarded
puk wrote:
I can't keep up with this debate. It's growing faster than I can keep up. In any event, it has nothing to do with demonization of Islam any more.
I'm bowing out.
you realized that rather quick. Btw there is a problem. How can you Demonize a religion that has already been made into a demon by its followers? Take a fix, couple of drinks and come back later, who knows what happens next.
_________________ follow me or get out of the way
Posted: Sat May 01, 2010 3:25 pm
_Master_
A Winner is me!
Joined: Jun 18, 2009
Posts: 1711
berzerker wrote:
It did not occur to you that you can remove the danger to society posed by someone in other ways than by killing him? And I wrote as long as they are dangerous for a reason.
i indeed believe you wrote it for a reason and so thats i why i was wanting to know your reason.
berzerker wrote:
Many criminals have psychological problems (these psychologist you know will confirm this) and may be curable, and if it isn't, it may disappear over time (elderly are usually much less criminal than younger people) and if neither of these applies you could lock them up for good. I had expected this to be obvious, my mistake.
may be curable and may not be. but i would prefer if my taxes where better used to swiftly silence such psychopaths and save the maintenance costs on science research and Dev, or rehabilitation housing for the poor or other nobler activities. perhaps a certain random percentage of them could be used for gene research to prevent such cases from happening in the future. in that case yes I fully agree with you the execution could be temporarily halted. otherwise it is simply an inefficient solution. jails are getting crowded, too many people on the earth, strained resources. this is just my humble opinion.
_________________ follow me or get out of the way
Posted: Sat May 01, 2010 4:00 pm
Dick_In_Your_Ass
A Winner is me!
Joined: Jul 03, 2009
Posts: 957
Location: iCarly Studio
FUCK YOU ALL is a peddler of some sort ain't he?
Posted: Sat May 01, 2010 4:49 pm
Suislide
VGS Admin
Joined: Aug 14, 2003
Posts: 509
Alez wrote:
Suislide wrote:
Also, your claim that everyone in a country uses drugs or has used drugs is absolute drivel.
More than half in the US apparently, I'd say that's quite a lot. Numbers in the UK do not seem too different. Most marihuana by the way, so no problem there, this is harmless stuff, tobacco or vodka is probably more dangerous and certainly more addictive. What's your problem with marihuana anyway, other than that you live in a country in which it happens to be illegal (free country, WTF)?
He stated that everyone in a country has, which is double the claims that you show. I never denied that people do drugs, nor that it was less than half, I only said that not everyone in the country does drugs. Not to mention, we are speaking directly of hard drugs (at least I was), not marijuana, tobacco or alcohol.
Besides, you are going to side with a guy who doesn't understand why people drink but wants to legalize hard drugs because he thinks they aren't that bad for you (which is ludicrous as it's medically documented of the effects of all harder drugs).
Suislide wrote:
Largest causes of death? So pass laws making it illegal for people to be obese and stop driving cars? Sounds like a great country.
Alez wrote:
I'm not sure: what do you think is the fundamental difference with prohibiting the use of drugs? It's regulating behavior. I do not see why it would be a fundamental human right to drive a car. Typically short-sighted american thinking: their freedoms are fundamental while other countries freedoms are insignificant. Master shows the same signs. The 'not invented here' syndome I guess.
Why should I care about your freedoms? I've never argued against regulating behavior or prohibiting certain things. That is solely you putting words into my mouth in order to form an argument.
Alez wrote:
Suislide wrote:
Once your IQ reaches double digits you should only then consider replying to me.
Pure Suislidian!
What's your IQ by the way? Can't be too high I reckon.
My IQ is 163.
Quote:
Last edited by Suislide on Sat May 01, 2010 5:30 pm, edited 1 time in total
Posted: Sat May 01, 2010 5:05 pm
Dick_In_Your_Ass
A Winner is me!
Joined: Jul 03, 2009
Posts: 957
Location: iCarly Studio
i always knew you were smart.fuck that sounds gay.but still
Posted: Sun May 02, 2010 1:32 am
berzerker
A Winner is me!
Joined: Nov 01, 2006
Posts: 2350
Suislide wrote:
He stated that everyone in a country has, which is double the claims that you show.
Eh, I said *almost* everyone. That's a bit too strong, based on these figures, but not too far off.
Suislide wrote:
Not to mention, we are speaking directly of hard drugs (at least I was).
I wasn't, way to discuss, making vital assumptions without specifying them. I am not against banning hard drugs, I am saying that applying the same rules to marihuana etc as to hard drugs is absurd. So basically we agree.
Please read next time before posting, just having a high IQ does not suffice, you must use it too.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Page 9 of 15Goto page Previous1, 2, 3 ... 8, 9, 10 ... 13, 14, 15Next
