Death penalty for drug dealers?

[Hillbilly 12]

Originally Posted by TylerThomson

If you can't see the difference I can't help you

What is different?, a valuable life is still lost, it's just if you do it it's ok

[TylerThomson]

Originally Posted by Hillbilly 12

What is different?, a valuable life is still lost, it's just if you do it it's ok

Obviously I can't help you

[Hillbilly 12]

Originally Posted by TylerThomson

Obviously I can't help you

Good answer.

[fordtruckin]

Me thinks after a few successful prosecutions it may have an effect.. I think they'd be better off just cutting a hand off like they do to thief's in the middle east...

[270person]

Originally Posted by JD848

So fentanyl dealer are allowed to kill ,but you think killing people is wrong,read your own crap.Fentanyl deaths were 4000 last year,many of them not hard core users so it's oka to poison some one and kill them

How many deaths attributable to alcohol and cigarettes over the same time period? Just wondering if you'd know.

Any problems with people that sell alcohol or cigarettes or because it's legal does that make it ok to do so?

Also, do you think the people that smoke cigarettes, drink alcohol, and buy fentanyl are naive to the potential end results? I'd find that hard to believe myself what with all the bad press those things get.

Just playing a little devils advocate here and wondering at what point it's ok to assume that people should be responsible for there own well being. I haven't read anywhere of people being forced by evil others to smoke, drink, and do drugs.

[JD848]

Originally Posted by 270person

How many deaths attributable to alcohol and cigarettes over the same time period? Just wondering if you'd know.

Any problems with people that sell alcohol or cigarettes or because it's legal does that make it ok to do so?

Also, do you think the people that smoke cigarettes, drink alcohol, and buy fentanyl are naive to the potential end results? I'd find that hard to believe myself what with all the bad press those things get.

Just playing a little devils advocate here and wondering at what point it's ok to assume that people should be responsible for there own well being. I haven't read anywhere of people being forced by evil others to smoke, drink, and do drugs.

Selling tainted drugs that kill within minutes is not in the same ball park,your poisoning that person without there consent or knowledge of what there taking inside there body,police officers getting poisoned by just touching the stuff and you compare this to smokes or a drink.
If you kill someone with out them knowing that someone put it in there drink or selling a gram of blow you are responsible for selling a tainted product that kills humans which is very illegal.If someone filled a cig with a bit of fentanyl and you die you think you should be responsible for your death from smoking that cig .Just because a person is an addict does not give the right to anyone to taint there drugs of choice including booze and cigs,if you want to poison people than I hope they swing you high by the neck from a court order.

[buckbrush]

Originally Posted by 270person

How many deaths attributable to alcohol and cigarettes over the same time period? Just wondering if you'd know.

Any problems with people that sell alcohol or cigarettes or because it's legal does that make it ok to do so?

Also, do you think the people that smoke cigarettes, drink alcohol, and buy fentanyl are naive to the potential end results? I'd find that hard to believe myself what with all the bad press those things get.

Just playing a little devils advocate here and wondering at what point it's ok to assume that people should be responsible for there own well being. I haven't read anywhere of people being forced by evil others to smoke, drink, and do drugs.

WOW! Someone who doesn't agree with the majority here but still makes a valid and thought provoking argument?

I don't even know how to respond to that one. I respectfully withdraw my vote.

[TylerThomson]

Originally Posted by JD848

Selling tainted drugs that kill within minutes is not in the same ball park,your poisoning that person without there consent or knowledge of what there taking inside there body,police officers getting poisoned by just touching the stuff and you compare this to smokes or a drink.
If you kill someone with out them knowing that someone put it in there drink or gram of blow you are responsible for selling a tainted product that kills humans which is very illegal.If someone filled a cig with a bit of fentanyl and you die you think you should be responsible for your death from smoking that cig .Just because a person is an addict does not give the right to anyone to taint there drugs of choice including booze and cigs,if you want to poison people than I hope they swing you high by the neck from a court order.

Which is why we need to end prohibition. Same thing happened with booze back in the day. Make all drugs legal and spend the money that's wasted on the drug war on rehabilitation and social programs to fight drug abuse at its root cause.

[buckbrush]

Originally Posted by JD848

Selling tainted drugs that kill within minutes is not in the same ball park,your poisoning that person without there consent or knowledge of what there taking inside there body,police officers getting poisoned by just touching the stuff and you compare this to smokes or a drink.
If you kill someone with out them knowing that someone put it in there drink or gram of blow you are responsible for selling a tainted product that kills humans which is very illegal.If someone filled a cig with a bit of fentanyl and you die you think you should be responsible for your death from smoking that cig .Just because a person is an addict does not give the right to anyone to taint there drugs of choice including booze and cigs,if you want to poison people than I hope they swing you high by the neck from a court order.

Also a great point.

I think lacing and poisoning are different than someone selling a person fentanyl who knows that is what they are getting.

[buckbrush]

Originally Posted by TylerThomson

Which is why we need to end prohibition. Same thing happened with booze back in the day. Make all drugs legal and spend the money that's wasted on the drug war on rehabilitation and social programs to fight drug abuse at its root cause.

Has the ending of prohibition proven to lower the amount of deaths attributed to alcohol, drunk driving and drunken violence?

[TylerThomson]

Originally Posted by buckbrush

Also a great point.

I think lacing and poisoning are different than someone selling a person fentanyl who knows that is what they are getting.

All hard drugs are cut now. There's to much profit to be made. Some cuts are harmless, others not so much. Another argument for legalization.

[buckbrush]

Originally Posted by TylerThomson

All hard drugs are cut now. There's to much profit to be made. Some cuts are harmless, others not so much. Another argument for legalization.

Oh, ok. I did not know. If you knowingly sell someone a poison as something else and that person dies it should be first degree murder.

[TylerThomson]

Originally Posted by buckbrush

Oh, ok. I did not know. If you knowingly sell someone a poison as something else and that person dies it should be first degree murder.

I agree. And yet first degree murder in Canada does not carry a death penalty. They should do life in prison. Look at that, I think we just found some middle ground.

[JD848]

Originally Posted by TylerThomson

All hard drugs are cut now. There's to much profit to be made. Some cuts are harmless, others not so much. Another argument for legalization.

You can step on whatever drug you choose,but if it's deadly than you crossed a very illegal boundary from being a dealer to murderer and that is where the law looks at you as a murderer not a dealer.Plus if tainted and you knew people were going to die so you just up the anti in your charges to first degree.No different than putting arsenic and step it up with that.

[buckbrush]

Originally Posted by TylerThomson

I agree. And yet first degree murder in Canada does not carry a death penalty. They should do life in prison. Look at that, I think we just found some middle ground.

Close! Although I think first degree murder if proven without a doubt should be execution without delay.

[Hillbilly 12]

Originally Posted by buckbrush

Close! Although I think first degree murder if proven without a doubt should be execution without delay.

He says absolulty no to that. Had that discution with him. I said the killer on the grey hound bus holding the victims head in his hand should have been killer. He said no to the death penalty for him.

[sns2]

Don't feed the trolls or banned returnees please.