Poll of the Day > When celebrities do heroin...they go to rehab. When normal people do heroin....

Topic List	Page List: 1, 2, 3
Keebs05 07/27/18 4:53:43 AM #52:	Kyuubi4269 posted... Keebs05 posted... Who did they "aid and abet?" How do you know that the drugs were purchased by a user? How do you know that the drugs were purchased at all? This is pretty simple, if they did not get it elsewhere then they're a producer and so can be arrested for a loooong time. If they don't reveal their supplier then they helped the dealer commit a crime (supplying them). With zero proof to bring prosecutors. --- "Old soldiers never die, they just fade away" R.I.P PFC Dusty Seidel <cite>Keebs05 posted [p:905796685] in When celeb... [t:76844877]...</cite> <quote><cite>Kyuubi4269 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Keebs05 posted...</cite> <quote>Who did they "aid and abet?" How do you know that the drugs were purchased by a user? How do you know that the drugs were purchased at all?</quote> This is pretty simple, if they did not get it elsewhere then they're a producer and so can be arrested for a loooong time. If they don't reveal their supplier then they helped the dealer commit a crime (supplying them).</quote> With zero proof to bring prosecutors.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Kyuubi4269 07/27/18 4:59:00 AM #53:	Keebs05 posted... Kyuubi4269 posted... Keebs05 posted... Who did they "aid and abet?" How do you know that the drugs were purchased by a user? How do you know that the drugs were purchased at all? This is pretty simple, if they did not get it elsewhere then they're a producer and so can be arrested for a loooong time. If they don't reveal their supplier then they helped the dealer commit a crime (supplying them). With zero proof to bring prosecutors. The proof being their testimony. Weed doesn't spontaneously appear. --- Scloud posted... Its like he wants two things at the same time. <cite>Kyuubi4269 posted [p:905796760] in When celeb... [t:76844877]...</cite> <quote><cite>Keebs05 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Kyuubi4269 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Keebs05 posted...</cite> <quote>Who did they "aid and abet?" How do you know that the drugs were purchased by a user? How do you know that the drugs were purchased at all?</quote> This is pretty simple, if they did not get it elsewhere then they're a producer and so can be arrested for a loooong time. If they don't reveal their supplier then they helped the dealer commit a crime (supplying them).</quote> With zero proof to bring prosecutors.</quote> The proof being their testimony. Weed doesn't spontaneously appear.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
AllstarSniper32 07/27/18 5:00:13 AM #54:	GreenKnight127 posted... I actually live in the real world Reading your posts in this topic, it doesn't sound like you do. --- If the people only understood the rank injustice of our money and banking systems, there would be a revolution before morning - Andrew Jackson <cite>AllstarSniper32 posted [p:905796778] in When celeb... [t:76844877]...</cite> <quote><cite>GreenKnight127 posted...</cite> <quote>I actually live in the real world</quote> Reading your posts in this topic, it doesn't sound like you do.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Keebs05 07/27/18 5:04:29 AM #55:	Kyuubi4269 posted... Keebs05 posted... Kyuubi4269 posted... Keebs05 posted... Who did they "aid and abet?" How do you know that the drugs were purchased by a user? How do you know that the drugs were purchased at all? This is pretty simple, if they did not get it elsewhere then they're a producer and so can be arrested for a loooong time. If they don't reveal their supplier then they helped the dealer commit a crime (supplying them). With zero proof to bring prosecutors. The proof being their testimony. Weed doesn't spontaneously appear. When did we start discussing weed? --- "Old soldiers never die, they just fade away" R.I.P PFC Dusty Seidel <cite>Keebs05 posted [p:905796855] in When celeb... [t:76844877]...</cite> <quote><cite>Kyuubi4269 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Keebs05 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Kyuubi4269 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Keebs05 posted...</cite> <quote>Who did they "aid and abet?" How do you know that the drugs were purchased by a user? How do you know that the drugs were purchased at all?</quote> This is pretty simple, if they did not get it elsewhere then they're a producer and so can be arrested for a loooong time. If they don't reveal their supplier then they helped the dealer commit a crime (supplying them).</quote> With zero proof to bring prosecutors.</quote> The proof being their testimony. Weed doesn't spontaneously appear.</quote> When did we start discussing weed?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Kyuubi4269 07/27/18 5:11:03 AM #56:	Keebs05 posted... Kyuubi4269 posted... Keebs05 posted... Kyuubi4269 posted... Keebs05 posted... Who did they "aid and abet?" How do you know that the drugs were purchased by a user? How do you know that the drugs were purchased at all? This is pretty simple, if they did not get it elsewhere then they're a producer and so can be arrested for a loooong time. If they don't reveal their supplier then they helped the dealer commit a crime (supplying them). With zero proof to bring prosecutors. The proof being their testimony. Weed doesn't spontaneously appear. When did we start discussing weed? Are you implying heroin does spontaneously appear? lol stay on topic. --- Scloud posted... Its like he wants two things at the same time. <cite>Kyuubi4269 posted [p:905796958] in When celeb... [t:76844877]...</cite> <quote><cite>Keebs05 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Kyuubi4269 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Keebs05 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Kyuubi4269 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Keebs05 posted...</cite> <quote>Who did they "aid and abet?" How do you know that the drugs were purchased by a user? How do you know that the drugs were purchased at all?</quote> This is pretty simple, if they did not get it elsewhere then they're a producer and so can be arrested for a loooong time. If they don't reveal their supplier then they helped the dealer commit a crime (supplying them).</quote> With zero proof to bring prosecutors.</quote> The proof being their testimony. Weed doesn't spontaneously appear.</quote> When did we start discussing weed?</quote> Are you implying heroin does spontaneously appear? lol stay on topic.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Mead 07/27/18 5:19:26 AM #57:	Let me borrow some weed and I can make it spontaneously disappear --- If they drag you through the mud, it doesnt change whats in your blood <cite>Mead posted [p:905797102] in When celeb... [t:76844877]...</cite> <quote>Let me borrow some weed and I can make it spontaneously disappear </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Keebs05 07/27/18 5:20:59 AM #58:	You haven't provided any proof that would hold up to support any counts of aid and abetting, producing or distributing. You and TC are assuming that the heroin was bought by the user, the heroin was used in his house all alone and that he knew the dealer. From my experience, heroin users don't always use in their own places (easily 50/50), they rarely use alone and they typically get their supply from whoever will sell it for the cheapest, stranger or acquaintance. I'm not even 100% sure why TC is so hung up on aiding and abetting anyway. Most of the time, aiding and abetting is a misdemeanor. That's a maximum of 1 year in jail. You're not going to get a junkie to flip by threatening them with a year. --- "Old soldiers never die, they just fade away" R.I.P PFC Dusty Seidel <cite>Keebs05 posted [p:905797129] in When celeb... [t:76844877]...</cite> <quote>You haven't provided any proof that would hold up to support any counts of aid and abetting, producing or distributing. You and TC are assuming that the heroin was bought by the user, the heroin was used in his house all alone and that he knew the dealer. From my experience, heroin users don't always use in their own places (easily 50/50), they rarely use alone and they typically get their supply from whoever will sell it for the cheapest, stranger or acquaintance. I'm not even 100% sure why TC is so hung up on aiding and abetting anyway. Most of the time, aiding and abetting is a misdemeanor. That's a maximum of 1 year in jail. You're not going to get a junkie to flip by threatening them with a year.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Kyuubi4269 07/27/18 5:29:32 AM #59:	Keebs05 posted... You haven't provided any proof that would hold up to support any counts of aid and abetting, producing or distributing. Clearly that needs changing. Keebs05 posted... You and TC are assuming that the heroin was bought by the user, the heroin was used in his house all alone and that he knew the dealer. From my experience, heroin users don't always use in their own places (easily 50/50), they rarely use alone and they typically get their supply from whoever will sell it for the cheapest, stranger or acquaintance. Notice how no scenario exists where a heroin user neither produced or had been supplied heroin. A crime was definitely committed so it's inappropriate to not give him at least the lower charge (aiding and abetting). --- Scloud posted... Its like he wants two things at the same time. <cite>Kyuubi4269 posted [p:905797253] in When celeb... [t:76844877]...</cite> <quote><cite>Keebs05 posted...</cite> <quote>You haven't provided any proof that would hold up to support any counts of aid and abetting, producing or distributing.</quote> Clearly that needs changing. <cite>Keebs05 posted...</cite> <quote>You and TC are assuming that the heroin was bought by the user, the heroin was used in his house all alone and that he knew the dealer. From my experience, heroin users don't always use in their own places (easily 50/50), they rarely use alone and they typically get their supply from whoever will sell it for the cheapest, stranger or acquaintance. </quote> Notice how no scenario exists where a heroin user neither produced or had been supplied heroin. A crime was definitely committed so it's inappropriate to not give him at least the lower charge (aiding and abetting).</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Keebs05 07/27/18 5:37:32 AM #60:	Kyuubi4269 posted... Notice how no scenario exists where a heroin user neither produced or had been supplied heroin. A crime was definitely committed so it's inappropriate to not give him at least the lower charge (aiding and abetting). With zero proof of production or a sale, an aiding and abetting charge will not stick. --- "Old soldiers never die, they just fade away" R.I.P PFC Dusty Seidel <cite>Keebs05 posted [p:905797361] in When celeb... [t:76844877]...</cite> <quote><cite>Kyuubi4269 posted...</cite> <quote>Notice how no scenario exists where a heroin user neither produced or had been supplied heroin. A crime was definitely committed so it's inappropriate to not give him at least the lower charge (aiding and abetting).</quote> With zero proof of production or a sale, an aiding and abetting charge will not stick.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
AllstarSniper32 07/27/18 5:40:38 AM #61:	Keebs05 posted... With zero proof of production or a sale, an aiding and abetting charge will not stick. Some people must not know that you can buy things under the counter. --- If the people only understood the rank injustice of our money and banking systems, there would be a revolution before morning - Andrew Jackson <cite>AllstarSniper32 posted [p:905797415] in When celeb... [t:76844877]...</cite> <quote><cite>Keebs05 posted...</cite> <quote>With zero proof of production or a sale, an aiding and abetting charge will not stick.</quote> Some people must not know that you can buy things under the counter.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Kyuubi4269 07/27/18 5:41:23 AM #62:	Keebs05 posted... Kyuubi4269 posted... Notice how no scenario exists where a heroin user neither produced or had been supplied heroin. A crime was definitely committed so it's inappropriate to not give him at least the lower charge (aiding and abetting). With zero proof of production or a sale, an aiding and abetting charge will not stick. By denying one they implicitly confess to the other as no other circumstance exists. We know that heroin was aquired as they had/used it so they would be aware which one they did. They're a key witness in their own crimes. --- Scloud posted... Its like he wants two things at the same time. <cite>Kyuubi4269 posted [p:905797427] in When celeb... [t:76844877]...</cite> <quote><cite>Keebs05 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Kyuubi4269 posted...</cite> <quote>Notice how no scenario exists where a heroin user neither produced or had been supplied heroin. A crime was definitely committed so it's inappropriate to not give him at least the lower charge (aiding and abetting).</quote> With zero proof of production or a sale, an aiding and abetting charge will not stick.</quote> By denying one they implicitly confess to the other as no other circumstance exists. We know that heroin was aquired as they had/used it so they would be aware which one they did. They're a key witness in their own crimes.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Keebs05 07/27/18 5:48:41 AM #63:	Kyuubi4269 posted... Keebs05 posted... Kyuubi4269 posted... Notice how no scenario exists where a heroin user neither produced or had been supplied heroin. A crime was definitely committed so it's inappropriate to not give him at least the lower charge (aiding and abetting). With zero proof of production or a sale, an aiding and abetting charge will not stick. By denying one they implicitly confess to the other as no other circumstance exists. We know that heroin was aquired as they had/used it so they would be aware which one they did. They're a key witness in their own crimes. Well worded false dichotomy but it's hardly conclusive. --- "Old soldiers never die, they just fade away" R.I.P PFC Dusty Seidel <cite>Keebs05 posted [p:905797555] in When celeb... [t:76844877]...</cite> <quote><cite>Kyuubi4269 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Keebs05 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Kyuubi4269 posted...</cite> <quote>Notice how no scenario exists where a heroin user neither produced or had been supplied heroin. A crime was definitely committed so it's inappropriate to not give him at least the lower charge (aiding and abetting).</quote> With zero proof of production or a sale, an aiding and abetting charge will not stick.</quote> By denying one they implicitly confess to the other as no other circumstance exists. We know that heroin was aquired as they had/used it so they would be aware which one they did. They're a key witness in their own crimes.</quote> Well worded false dichotomy but it's hardly conclusive.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Mead 07/27/18 5:51:15 AM #64:	Selling illegal drugs should be illegal Using them should not be. Locking up addicts instead of directing them towards help creates far more negative outcomes than positive for society --- If they drag you through the mud, it doesnt change whats in your blood <cite>Mead posted [p:905797602] in When celeb... [t:76844877]...</cite> <quote>Selling illegal drugs should be illegal Using them should not be. Locking up addicts instead of directing them towards help creates far more negative outcomes than positive for society</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Dikitain 07/27/18 6:57:28 AM #65:	Rehab is such a broad and un-uniform term that saying people should "get help instead of go to prison" literally means nothing. I can rent out the spare bedroom in my house, call it rehab, and the person who lives here would be getting better care then they are at most celebrity rehab facilities. --- I am a senior software engineer. If you see me post here, I am tired of writing TPS reports. <cite>Dikitain posted [p:905798835] in When celeb... [t:76844877]...</cite> <quote>Rehab is such a broad and un-uniform term that saying people should "get help instead of go to prison" literally means nothing. I can rent out the spare bedroom in my house, call it rehab, and the person who lives here would be getting better care then they are at most celebrity rehab facilities.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Kyuubi4269 07/27/18 7:00:15 AM #66:	Keebs05 posted... Kyuubi4269 posted... Keebs05 posted... Kyuubi4269 posted... Notice how no scenario exists where a heroin user neither produced or had been supplied heroin. A crime was definitely committed so it's inappropriate to not give him at least the lower charge (aiding and abetting). With zero proof of production or a sale, an aiding and abetting charge will not stick. By denying one they implicitly confess to the other as no other circumstance exists. We know that heroin was aquired as they had/used it so they would be aware which one they did. They're a key witness in their own crimes. Well worded false dichotomy but it's hardly conclusive. It's not a false dichotomy, there are no other options. If you believe it is, prove evidence. --- Scloud posted... Its like he wants two things at the same time. <cite>Kyuubi4269 posted [p:905798909] in When celeb... [t:76844877]...</cite> <quote><cite>Keebs05 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Kyuubi4269 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Keebs05 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Kyuubi4269 posted...</cite> <quote>Notice how no scenario exists where a heroin user neither produced or had been supplied heroin. A crime was definitely committed so it's inappropriate to not give him at least the lower charge (aiding and abetting).</quote> With zero proof of production or a sale, an aiding and abetting charge will not stick.</quote> By denying one they implicitly confess to the other as no other circumstance exists. We know that heroin was aquired as they had/used it so they would be aware which one they did. They're a key witness in their own crimes.</quote> Well worded false dichotomy but it's hardly conclusive.</quote> It's not a false dichotomy, there are no other options. If you believe it is, prove evidence.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
GreenKnight127 07/27/18 7:03:53 AM #67:	Keebs05 posted... Kyuubi4269 posted... Keebs05 posted... Kyuubi4269 posted... Notice how no scenario exists where a heroin user neither produced or had been supplied heroin. A crime was definitely committed so it's inappropriate to not give him at least the lower charge (aiding and abetting). With zero proof of production or a sale, an aiding and abetting charge will not stick. By denying one they implicitly confess to the other as no other circumstance exists. We know that heroin was aquired as they had/used it so they would be aware which one they did. They're a key witness in their own crimes. Well worded false dichotomy but it's hardly conclusive. Keebs, you are just being dense at this point. Kyuubi broke it down in the most easy-to-understand way possible. A person who used heroin either: A. produced the heroin themselves. (Illegal) B. bought it from a dealer. (Illegal) C. stumbled upon it in the god damn woods and chose to use it. (stupid and illegal) All I'm saying is that cops should question known heroin users. Find out how they got the heroin they used. Investigate. Find the dealer. Arrest the dealer. Because the user clearly knows how they got their heroin....and by choosing NOT to tell the cops....they are committing a crime by either covering their own ass who made the heroin, or the dealer who supplied them. Either way, I grow tired of druggies getting a pity party.....when what should REALLY be happening, is someone's ass goes to jail. --- ~Gamefaqs logic: Q: If it's so obviously a troll topic...why are you responding to it? A: "Because I have to tell them it's a troll topic!" facepalm <cite>GreenKnight127 posted [p:905798992] in When celeb... [t:76844877]...</cite> <quote><cite>Keebs05 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Kyuubi4269 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Keebs05 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Kyuubi4269 posted...</cite> <quote>Notice how no scenario exists where a heroin user neither produced or had been supplied heroin. A crime was definitely committed so it's inappropriate to not give him at least the lower charge (aiding and abetting).</quote> With zero proof of production or a sale, an aiding and abetting charge will not stick.</quote> By denying one they implicitly confess to the other as no other circumstance exists. We know that heroin was aquired as they had/used it so they would be aware which one they did. They're a key witness in their own crimes.</quote> Well worded false dichotomy but it's hardly conclusive.</quote> Keebs, you are just being dense at this point. Kyuubi broke it down in the most easy-to-understand way possible. A person who used heroin either: A. produced the heroin themselves. (Illegal) B. bought it from a dealer. (Illegal) C. stumbled upon it in the god damn woods and chose to use it. (stupid and illegal) All I'm saying is that cops should question known heroin users. Find out how they got the heroin they used. Investigate. Find the dealer. Arrest the dealer. Because the user clearly knows how they got their heroin....and by choosing NOT to tell the cops....they are committing a crime by either covering their own ass who made the heroin, or the dealer who supplied them. Either way, I grow tired of druggies getting a pity party.....when what should REALLY be happening, is someone's ass goes to jail.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Mead 07/27/18 7:19:53 AM #68:	Dikitain posted... Rehab is such a broad and un-uniform term that saying people should "get help instead of go to prison" literally means nothing. I can rent out the spare bedroom in my house, call it rehab, and the person who lives here would be getting better care then they are at most celebrity rehab facilities. It should be regulated Not sure why you think the alternative should be imprisoning people though. Weve been doing that for decades and it is a colossal failure --- If they drag you through the mud, it doesnt change whats in your blood <cite>Mead posted [p:905799352] in When celeb... [t:76844877]...</cite> <quote><cite>Dikitain posted...</cite> <quote>Rehab is such a broad and un-uniform term that saying people should "get help instead of go to prison" literally means nothing. I can rent out the spare bedroom in my house, call it rehab, and the person who lives here would be getting better care then they are at most celebrity rehab facilities.</quote> It should be regulated Not sure why you think the alternative should be imprisoning people though. Weve been doing that for decades and it is a colossal failure</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Keebs05 07/27/18 7:27:07 AM #69:	GreenKnight127 posted... A. produced the heroin themselves. (Illegal) B. bought it from a dealer. (Illegal) C. stumbled upon it in the god damn woods and chose to use it. (stupid and illegal) Or they're using someone else's stash. Or they were drugged without their knowledge. Or they took a medication that was laced with it (all 3 of which I have personally responded to) but hey, only 2 possible circumstances right, Kyuubi? GreenKnight127 posted... and by choosing NOT to tell the cops....they are committing a crime by either covering their own ass who made the heroin, Do me a favor and look up the 5th Amendment. Listen, clearly nobody's mind is going to get changed (yet I'm the dense one) so believe whatever the hell you want. After 6 hours of arguing and beating my head against the wall, I've grown tired. I deal with overdoses on a frighteningly regular basis. Jail and prison won't help but believe what you want. I guess all I can do is be thankful that TC isn't a cop. --- "Old soldiers never die, they just fade away" R.I.P PFC Dusty Seidel <cite>Keebs05 posted [p:905799503] in When celeb... [t:76844877]...</cite> <quote><cite>GreenKnight127 posted...</cite> <quote>A. produced the heroin themselves. (Illegal) B. bought it from a dealer. (Illegal) C. stumbled upon it in the god damn woods and chose to use it. (stupid and illegal)</quote> Or they're using someone else's stash. Or they were drugged without their knowledge. Or they took a medication that was laced with it (all 3 of which I have personally responded to) but hey, only 2 possible circumstances right, Kyuubi? <cite>GreenKnight127 posted...</cite> <quote>and by choosing NOT to tell the cops....they are committing a crime by either covering their own ass who made the heroin,</quote> Do me a favor and look up the 5th Amendment. Listen, clearly nobody's mind is going to get changed (yet I'm the dense one) so believe whatever the hell you want. After 6 hours of arguing and beating my head against the wall, I've grown tired. I deal with overdoses on a frighteningly regular basis. Jail and prison won't help but believe what you want. I guess all I can do is be thankful that TC isn't a cop.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Dikitain 07/27/18 7:47:01 AM #70:	Mead posted... Dikitain posted... Rehab is such a broad and un-uniform term that saying people should "get help instead of go to prison" literally means nothing. I can rent out the spare bedroom in my house, call it rehab, and the person who lives here would be getting better care then they are at most celebrity rehab facilities. It should be regulated Not sure why you think the alternative should be imprisoning people though. Weve been doing that for decades and it is a colossal failure Never said it should be. I am just saying people who are imprisoned have less chance of relapsing then people who go to "rehab". --- I am a senior software engineer. If you see me post here, I am tired of writing TPS reports. <cite>Dikitain posted [p:905800001] in When celeb... [t:76844877]...</cite> <quote><cite>Mead posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Dikitain posted...</cite> <quote>Rehab is such a broad and un-uniform term that saying people should "get help instead of go to prison" literally means nothing. I can rent out the spare bedroom in my house, call it rehab, and the person who lives here would be getting better care then they are at most celebrity rehab facilities.</quote> It should be regulated Not sure why you think the alternative should be imprisoning people though. Weve been doing that for decades and it is a colossal failure</quote> Never said it should be. I am just saying people who are imprisoned have less chance of relapsing then people who go to "rehab".</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Kyuubi4269 07/27/18 8:05:38 AM #71:	Keebs05 posted... Or they're using someone else's stash. Stealing, illegal, rat out person in possession, check them for a dealer. Keebs05 posted... Or they were drugged without their knowledge. Not a user, not subject to police ridicule. Keebs05 posted... Or they took a medication that was laced with it Same as above, or it's done knowingly and again, user must surrender supplier. Keebs05 posted... but hey, only 2 possible circumstances right, Kyuubi? It's illegal action in all cases except when not subject to intervention at all and not relevant. Keebs05 posted... Do me a favor and look up the 5th Amendment. Surrendering a dealer isn't self-incriminating so the 5th amendment doesn't protect. In this circumstance, the accused is given the opportunity to prove they did not commit a greater offense. If they choose to remain silent, they aren't protecting themself from incrimination so they aren't protected from injury by their silence, thus leading to them damning themself with no counter evidence. --- Scloud posted... Its like he wants two things at the same time. <cite>Kyuubi4269 posted [p:905800502] in When celeb... [t:76844877]...</cite> <quote><cite>Keebs05 posted...</cite> <quote>Or they're using someone else's stash. </quote> Stealing, illegal, rat out person in possession, check them for a dealer. <cite>Keebs05 posted...</cite> <quote>Or they were drugged without their knowledge.</quote> Not a user, not subject to police ridicule. <cite>Keebs05 posted...</cite> <quote>Or they took a medication that was laced with it </quote> Same as above, or it's done knowingly and again, user must surrender supplier. <cite>Keebs05 posted...</cite> <quote>but hey, only 2 possible circumstances right, Kyuubi?</quote> It's illegal action in all cases except when not subject to intervention at all and not relevant. <cite>Keebs05 posted...</cite> <quote>Do me a favor and look up the 5th Amendment.</quote> Surrendering a dealer isn't self-incriminating so the 5th amendment doesn't protect. In this circumstance, the accused is given the opportunity to prove they did not commit a greater offense. If they choose to remain silent, they aren't protecting themself from incrimination so they aren't protected from injury by their silence, thus leading to them damning themself with no counter evidence.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Noop_Noop 07/27/18 9:00:26 AM #72:	Lil69Leo posted... CacciatoPart3 posted... I thought they went to prison for possession, not usage. You have to posses it to use it. It's not like it magically appears in their veins. What he is saying is that you don't go to prison for being high on heroin. You go for actually having heroin. <cite>Noop_Noop posted [p:905802011] in When celeb... [t:76844877]...</cite> <quote><cite>Lil69Leo posted...</cite> <quote><cite>CacciatoPart3 posted...</cite> <quote>I thought they went to prison for possession, not usage.</quote> You have to posses it to use it. It's not like it magically appears in their veins.</quote> What he is saying is that you don't go to prison for being high on heroin. You go for actually having heroin.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Lil_Bit83 07/27/18 9:36:36 AM #73:	Uh no. If you get caught you get put in the slammer and then into rehab programs. Rehab programs are even available at places like treatment centers and group homes. And celebrities get chucked into jail for drug use all the damn time. Besides heroin use is a bit more dangerous to detox from then some drugs are. But that doesn't mean those people still aren't in deep with the law. --- I'm a chick <cite>Lil_Bit83 posted [p:905803201] in When celeb... [t:76844877]...</cite> <quote>Uh no. If you get caught you get put in the slammer and then into rehab programs. Rehab programs are even available at places like treatment centers and group homes. And celebrities get chucked into jail for drug use all the damn time. Besides heroin use is a bit more dangerous to detox from then some drugs are. But that doesn't mean those people still aren't in deep with the law.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Dynalo 07/27/18 9:55:36 AM #74:	Kyuubi4269 posted... Surrendering a dealer isn't self-incriminating so the 5th amendment doesn't protect. In this circumstance, the accused is given the opportunity to prove they did not commit a greater offense. You've already said yourself that one of the scenarios is that the user is also the producer. So this situation you've concocted either violates your fifth amendment (you have to testify against yourself) or results in a false charge (aiding and abetting... Yourself. Which makes no sense) - and is literally why the fifth amendment exists. You can't just slap random charges on people because you suspect something else. --- Assassins do it from behind. <cite>Dynalo posted [p:905803836] in When celeb... [t:76844877]...</cite> <quote><cite>Kyuubi4269 posted...</cite> <quote>Surrendering a dealer isn't self-incriminating so the 5th amendment doesn't protect. In this circumstance, the accused is given the opportunity to prove they did not commit a greater offense. </quote> You've already said yourself that one of the scenarios is that the user is also the producer. So this situation you've concocted either violates your fifth amendment (you have to testify against yourself) or results in a false charge (aiding and abetting... Yourself. Which makes no sense) - and is literally why the fifth amendment exists. You can't just slap random charges on people because you suspect something else.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Mead 07/27/18 10:10:56 AM #75:	Dikitain posted... Mead posted... Dikitain posted... Rehab is such a broad and un-uniform term that saying people should "get help instead of go to prison" literally means nothing. I can rent out the spare bedroom in my house, call it rehab, and the person who lives here would be getting better care then they are at most celebrity rehab facilities. It should be regulated Not sure why you think the alternative should be imprisoning people though. Weve been doing that for decades and it is a colossal failure Never said it should be. I am just saying people who are imprisoned have less chance of relapsing then people who go to "rehab". I really doubt that --- If they drag you through the mud, it doesnt change whats in your blood <cite>Mead posted [p:905804415] in When celeb... [t:76844877]...</cite> <quote><cite>Dikitain posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Mead posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Dikitain posted...</cite> <quote>Rehab is such a broad and un-uniform term that saying people should "get help instead of go to prison" literally means nothing. I can rent out the spare bedroom in my house, call it rehab, and the person who lives here would be getting better care then they are at most celebrity rehab facilities.</quote> It should be regulated Not sure why you think the alternative should be imprisoning people though. Weve been doing that for decades and it is a colossal failure</quote> Never said it should be. I am just saying people who are imprisoned have less chance of relapsing then people who go to "rehab".</quote> I really doubt that</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Star_Spirit 07/27/18 10:21:55 AM #76:	oh wow. an intelligent post on gamefaqs <cite>Star_Spirit posted [p:905804839] in When celeb... [t:76844877]...</cite> <quote>oh wow. an intelligent post on gamefaqs</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Jen0125 07/27/18 11:11:00 AM #77:	Lil_Bit83 posted... Uh no. If you get caught you get put in the slammer and then into rehab programs. Rehab programs are even available at places like treatment centers and group homes. And celebrities get chucked into jail for drug use all the damn time. Besides heroin use is a bit more dangerous to detox from then some drugs are. But that doesn't mean those people still aren't in deep with the law. Those people get arrested for possession, not for being high. Or sometimes even child endangerment because of being intoxicated. --- https://imgur.com/4ihiyS2 "I am not gay! Can't you get that through your head? I am very much aroused at the site of a naked woman!" - Dan0429 <cite>Jen0125 posted [p:905807003] in When celeb... [t:76844877]...</cite> <quote><cite>Lil_Bit83 posted...</cite> <quote>Uh no. If you get caught you get put in the slammer and then into rehab programs. Rehab programs are even available at places like treatment centers and group homes. And celebrities get chucked into jail for drug use all the damn time. Besides heroin use is a bit more dangerous to detox from then some drugs are. But that doesn't mean those people still aren't in deep with the law.</quote> Those people get arrested for possession, not for being high. Or sometimes even child endangerment because of being intoxicated.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Noop_Noop 07/27/18 11:33:55 AM #78:	Jen0125 posted... Lil_Bit83 posted... Uh no. If you get caught you get put in the slammer and then into rehab programs. Rehab programs are even available at places like treatment centers and group homes. And celebrities get chucked into jail for drug use all the damn time. Besides heroin use is a bit more dangerous to detox from then some drugs are. But that doesn't mean those people still aren't in deep with the law. Those people get arrested for possession, not for being high. Or sometimes even child endangerment because of being intoxicated. exactly. There is no law on the books that say it is illegal to be high on heroin. They tag you for possession, public intoxication, or child endangerment. <cite>Noop_Noop posted [p:905808115] in When celeb... [t:76844877]...</cite> <quote><cite>Jen0125 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Lil_Bit83 posted...</cite> <quote>Uh no. If you get caught you get put in the slammer and then into rehab programs. Rehab programs are even available at places like treatment centers and group homes. And celebrities get chucked into jail for drug use all the damn time. Besides heroin use is a bit more dangerous to detox from then some drugs are. But that doesn't mean those people still aren't in deep with the law.</quote> Those people get arrested for possession, not for being high. Or sometimes even child endangerment because of being intoxicated.</quote> exactly. There is no law on the books that say it is illegal to be high on heroin. They tag you for possession, public intoxication, or child endangerment.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Blorfenburger 07/27/18 11:34:11 AM #79:	Why would anyone do drugs when you could mow a lawn --- I use inverted controls. Also I hate fandoms. If you see a woman and you think she's thicc, she's probably not thicc. Come on boy you know what I'm all about. <cite>Blorfenburger posted [p:905808122] in When celeb... [t:76844877]...</cite> <quote>Why would anyone do drugs when you could mow a lawn</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Rasmoh 07/27/18 11:44:56 AM #80:	Kyuubi4269 posted... If they don't reveal their supplier Rasmoh posted... Good chance that they don't know who the dealer is, where to find them, if they're an actual source or just a lone wolf selling stuff they bought from someone else. Not to mention threats of violence. Drug dealers hurt and kill people. People who just possess drugs have enough run-ins with the law to know that just possession isn't going to keep them locked up for very long, whereas they know drug dealers will literally kill people for stealing paltry amounts of money or even intangible things like disrespect. And where do you propose we get the resources to hold all these addicts indefinitely while waiting for them to rat out their dealers? Jails and prisons are already booked to the limit with murderers, rapists, child molesters, batterers, money launderers, identity thieves, dealers who have gotten caught. Will any of you morons arguing for treating users as dealers please address my post? Anyone? --- Miami Dolphins \| Portland Trailblazers \| San Francisco Giants I won't say a thing, because the one who knows best is you. <cite>Rasmoh posted [p:905808623] in When celeb... [t:76844877]...</cite> <quote><cite>Kyuubi4269 posted...</cite> <quote>If they don't reveal their supplier</quote> <cite>Rasmoh posted...</cite> <quote>Good chance that they don't know who the dealer is, where to find them, if they're an actual source or just a lone wolf selling stuff they bought from someone else. Not to mention threats of violence. Drug dealers hurt and kill people. People who just possess drugs have enough run-ins with the law to know that just possession isn't going to keep them locked up for very long, whereas they know drug dealers will literally kill people for stealing paltry amounts of money or even intangible things like disrespect. And where do you propose we get the resources to hold all these addicts indefinitely while waiting for them to rat out their dealers? Jails and prisons are already booked to the limit with murderers, rapists, child molesters, batterers, money launderers, identity thieves, dealers who have gotten caught.</quote> Will any of you morons arguing for treating users as dealers please address my post? Anyone?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Jen0125 07/27/18 11:47:48 AM #81:	Blorfenburger posted... Why would anyone do drugs when you could mow a lawn Lmao I love you. --- https://imgur.com/4ihiyS2 "I am not gay! Can't you get that through your head? I am very much aroused at the site of a naked woman!" - Dan0429 <cite>Jen0125 posted [p:905808763] in When celeb... [t:76844877]...</cite> <quote><cite>Blorfenburger posted...</cite> <quote>Why would anyone do drugs when you could mow a lawn</quote> Lmao I love you.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
LeetCheet 07/27/18 11:54:28 AM #82:	I don't know if this has already been said but, pewdiepie apparently made a joke about her drug use and immediately got lots of hate for it because it was insensitive. Well yeah it is, but would people really care if the joke wasn't about a celebrity? --- https://imgur.com/eQrRxik https://imgur.com/NC8itow <cite>LeetCheet posted [p:905809105] in When celeb... [t:76844877]...</cite> <quote>I don't know if this has already been said but, pewdiepie apparently made a joke about her drug use and immediately got lots of hate for it because it was insensitive. Well yeah it is, but would people really care if the joke wasn't about a celebrity?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Mead 07/27/18 11:58:58 AM #83:	LeetCheet posted... I don't know if this has already been said but, pewdiepie apparently made a joke about her drug use and immediately got lots of hate for it because it was insensitive. Well yeah it is, but would people really care if the joke wasn't about a celebrity? No but theyd care if it was about any specific individual --- If they drag you through the mud, it doesnt change whats in your blood <cite>Mead posted [p:905809343] in When celeb... [t:76844877]...</cite> <quote><cite>LeetCheet posted...</cite> <quote>I don't know if this has already been said but, pewdiepie apparently made a joke about her drug use and immediately got lots of hate for it because it was insensitive. Well yeah it is, but would people really care if the joke wasn't about a celebrity?</quote> No but theyd care if it was about any specific individual</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
_AdjI_ 07/27/18 12:03:07 PM #84:	Better idea: Legalize all the drugs and distribute them in controlled environments where OD'ing will be virtually impossible and addictions can be well-managed. So long as the prices are reasonable, there won't be much of a black market left to worry about because the costs of smuggling it in will outweigh the potential profit to be made. Bonus points because this will go a long way toward defunding drug cartels and other forms of organized crime. <cite>_AdjI_ posted [p:905809534] in When celeb... [t:76844877]...</cite> <quote>Better idea: Legalize all the drugs and distribute them in controlled environments where OD'ing will be virtually impossible and addictions can be well-managed. So long as the prices are reasonable, there won't be much of a black market left to worry about because the costs of smuggling it in will outweigh the potential profit to be made. Bonus points because this will go a long way toward defunding drug cartels and other forms of organized crime.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Kyuubi4269 07/27/18 12:56:37 PM #85:	Dynalo posted... You've already said yourself that one of the scenarios is that the user is also the producer. So this situation you've concocted either violates your fifth amendment (you have to testify against yourself) If they have to plead the fifth then they did produce it, and on that basis an investigation could be done to prove such a "hunch". If no evidence of production is found then the police claim the defendant knowingly pleaded the fifth without grounds. The testimony is invalidated, but the further evidence is not. Dynalo posted... or results in a false charge (aiding and abetting... Yourself. Which makes no sense) People get arrested for things they don't do, and in this case the evidence points toward it being true unless they want to defend themself, so is valid grounds to charge. Dynalo posted... and is literally why the fifth amendment exists. You can't just slap random charges on people because you suspect something else. The fifth amendment is to stop people purgering themselves, in this case they already have evidence against them and what is being requested can only alleviate charges. Rasmoh posted... Will any of you morons arguing for treating users as dealers please address my post? Anyone? Yes, they do know who their dealer is. They may only be able to give a shitty description and location, but it doesn't matter as at minimum it puts pressure on dealers (without knowing they were ratted out), at best it gets a dealer charged with distribution and death threats. Because they know possession won't get them too bad you have to pin distribution on them to pressure them to surrender the bigger fish. The US already arrests everybody on BS charges, that's why the prisons are full in the first place, so why not a few addicts (who were already headed there anyway)? If prison capacity was really an issue, decriminalisation would happen, not harder policing. --- Scloud posted... Its like he wants two things at the same time. <cite>Kyuubi4269 posted [p:905812029] in When celeb... [t:76844877]...</cite> <quote><cite>Dynalo posted...</cite> <quote>You've already said yourself that one of the scenarios is that the user is also the producer. So this situation you've concocted either violates your fifth amendment (you have to testify against yourself)</quote> If they have to plead the fifth then they did produce it, and on that basis an investigation could be done to prove such a "hunch". If no evidence of production is found then the police claim the defendant knowingly pleaded the fifth without grounds. The testimony is invalidated, but the further evidence is not. <cite>Dynalo posted...</cite> <quote>or results in a false charge (aiding and abetting... Yourself. Which makes no sense)</quote> People get arrested for things they don't do, and in this case the evidence points toward it being true unless they want to defend themself, so is valid grounds to charge. <cite>Dynalo posted...</cite> <quote>and is literally why the fifth amendment exists. You can't just slap random charges on people because you suspect something else.</quote> The fifth amendment is to stop people purgering themselves, in this case they already have evidence against them and what is being requested can only alleviate charges. <cite>Rasmoh posted...</cite> <quote>Will any of you morons arguing for treating users as dealers please address my post? Anyone?</quote> Yes, they do know who their dealer is. They may only be able to give a shitty description and location, but it doesn't matter as at minimum it puts pressure on dealers (without knowing they were ratted out), at best it gets a dealer charged with distribution and death threats. Because they know possession won't get them too bad you have to pin distribution on them to pressure them to surrender the bigger fish. The US already arrests everybody on BS charges, that's why the prisons are full in the first place, so why not a few addicts (who were already headed there anyway)? If prison capacity was really an issue, decriminalisation would happen, not harder policing.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
GreenKnight127 07/27/18 7:10:20 PM #86:	LeetCheet posted... I don't know if this has already been said but, pewdiepie apparently made a joke about her drug use and immediately got lots of hate for it because it was insensitive. Well yeah it is, but would people really care if the joke wasn't about a celebrity? Celebrities have ALWAYS gotten special treatment. I remember back in the early 2000's when Lindsay Lohan got arrested for driving while drunk....on a suspended license, while on probation....AND she had COCAINE on her!!!! Guess what she got for it? House arrest, and more rehab. If I had done the same thing as her......I would have been in jail for 20 years or more. --- ~Gamefaqs logic: Q: If it's so obviously a troll topic...why are you responding to it? A: "Because I have to tell them it's a troll topic!" facepalm <cite>GreenKnight127 posted [p:905830995] in When celeb... [t:76844877]...</cite> <quote><cite>LeetCheet posted...</cite> <quote>I don't know if this has already been said but, pewdiepie apparently made a joke about her drug use and immediately got lots of hate for it because it was insensitive. Well yeah it is, but would people really care if the joke wasn't about a celebrity?</quote> Celebrities have ALWAYS gotten special treatment. I remember back in the early 2000's when Lindsay Lohan got arrested for driving while drunk....on a suspended license, while on probation....AND she had COCAINE on her!!!! Guess what she got for it? House arrest, and more rehab. If I had done the same thing as her......I would have been in jail for 20 years or more.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
PuddingBoy 07/27/18 7:54:19 PM #87:	lmao at the people thinking you should be able to interrogate people in a treatment facility. Yeah, that'll certainly make people want to seek treatment for their addictions. --- 3DS Friend Code: 3308-5843-0863 Town: Virginia <cite>PuddingBoy posted [p:905832945] in When celeb... [t:76844877]...</cite> <quote>lmao at the people thinking you should be able to interrogate people in a treatment facility. Yeah, that'll certainly make people want to seek treatment for their addictions.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
GreenKnight127 07/28/18 5:34:33 AM #88:	PuddingBoy posted... lmao at the people thinking you should be able to interrogate people in a treatment facility. Yeah, that'll certainly make people want to seek treatment for their addictions. Is there a law that states police can't question known drug users? "When did you start using? Where did you get your drugs from? Who is your dealer?" Extremely basic and logical questions you'd probably want to ask a heroin addict. And if the druggie chooses not to answer......then they are committing a crime. Because they aren't cooperating with an investigation. Withholding evidence. Looking out for their dealer. Looking out for themselves. Hoping they can get away with it all by claiming they are a "victim". It's pretty fascinating. Seriously....had ANYONE bothered to ask Demi Lovato where she was getting her heroin from? Or are people afraid to ask because it's "too sensitive" of a topic? LOL --- ~Gamefaqs logic: Q: If it's so obviously a troll topic...why are you responding to it? A: "Because I have to tell them it's a troll topic!" facepalm <cite>GreenKnight127 posted [p:905852765] in When celeb... [t:76844877]...</cite> <quote><cite>PuddingBoy posted...</cite> <quote>lmao at the people thinking you should be able to interrogate people in a treatment facility. Yeah, that'll certainly make people want to seek treatment for their addictions.</quote> Is there a law that states police can't question known drug users? "When did you start using? Where did you get your drugs from? Who is your dealer?" Extremely basic and logical questions you'd probably want to ask a heroin addict. And if the druggie chooses not to answer......then they are committing a crime. Because they aren't cooperating with an investigation. Withholding evidence. Looking out for their dealer. Looking out for themselves. Hoping they can get away with it all by claiming they are a "victim". It's pretty fascinating. Seriously....had ANYONE bothered to ask Demi Lovato where she was getting her heroin from? Or are people afraid to ask because it's "too sensitive" of a topic? LOL</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Mead 07/28/18 5:39:24 AM #89:	And if the druggie chooses not to answer......then they are committing a crime. Because they aren't cooperating with an investigation. Withholding evidence. Looking out for their dealer. Looking out for themselves. Hoping they can get away with it all by claiming they are a "victim". The legal system in the US doesnt operate that way at all Every individual has the right to remain silent. Choosing to do so is in no way considered withholding evidence. --- If they drag you through the mud, it doesnt change whats in your blood <cite>Mead posted [p:905852836] in When celeb... [t:76844877]...</cite> <quote><quote>And if the druggie chooses not to answer......then they are committing a crime. Because they aren't cooperating with an investigation. Withholding evidence. Looking out for their dealer. Looking out for themselves. Hoping they can get away with it all by claiming they are a "victim".</quote> The legal system in the US doesnt operate that way at all Every individual has the right to remain silent. Choosing to do so is in no way considered withholding evidence.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Jen0125 07/28/18 5:40:47 AM #90:	GreenKnight you really have literally no clue what you're talking about. --- https://imgur.com/4ihiyS2 "I am not gay! Can't you get that through your head? I am very much aroused at the site of a naked woman!" - Dan0429 <cite>Jen0125 posted [p:905852848] in When celeb... [t:76844877]...</cite> <quote>GreenKnight you really have literally no clue what you're talking about.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Rasmoh 07/28/18 5:43:58 AM #91:	Kyuubi4269 posted... Yes, they do know who their dealer is. They usually don't though. Most addicts get what they can from wherever. Also, their "dealer" is usually someone selling small amounts with little to no connection to dealers with any sort of power or quantity of product. They may only be able to give a shitty description and location, but it doesn't matter as at minimum it puts pressure on dealers (without knowing they were ratted out), Again, their "dealer" is likely some fucking nobody who buys and sells in small amounts to get by. Addicts would much rather stay quiet and deal with the justice system rather than risk pissing off dealers because dealers will respond with real violence. Because they know possession won't get them too bad you have to pin distribution on them to pressure them to surrender the bigger fish. The bigger fish swim away long before any of the street level dealers would ever be able to give out good info. And low level dealers are unlikely to try to sell out the "big fish" because they will respond with violence. I'm not sure you understand that actual drug dealers have little qualms about killing or maiming people who cross them to send a message. One of the cases being prosecuted in one of the courts I work for involves 3 people picking up a guy who stole $800 from a street distributor, tazing him, and beating him with a hammer. The only reason he got out alive is because he was able to kick the driver of their vehicle in the face during the struggle and cause them to wreck. Addicts do not want to fuck with these people. The US already arrests everybody on BS charges, that's why the prisons are full in the first place I can't imagine being this delusional. Drug possession is one of the only charges people get arrested for that could reasonably be called BS. Most arrests are reasonably made, triply so for arrests that have a realistic chance of prison time. My data analyst buddy would kill me for not remembering the exact stats, but an overwhelming majority of prison-worthy arrests involve an actual confession, with the exception of robbery. Prisons are full because we foolishly decide to let the worst society has to offer live out the rest of their lifespan instead of simply executing them. If prison capacity was really an issue, decriminalisation would happen, not harder policing Decriminalize what? Possession almost never puts people in prison. Possession barely keeps people in jails most of the time. These drugs need to be legalized and sold at a specialty store, the amount of good that could be done if this happened is astronomical. --- Miami Dolphins \| Portland Trailblazers \| San Francisco Giants I won't say a thing, because the one who knows best is you. <cite>Rasmoh posted [p:905852892] in When celeb... [t:76844877]...</cite> <quote><cite>Kyuubi4269 posted...</cite> <quote>Yes, they do know who their dealer is.</quote> They usually don't though. Most addicts get what they can from wherever. Also, their "dealer" is usually someone selling small amounts with little to no connection to dealers with any sort of power or quantity of product. <quote>They may only be able to give a shitty description and location, but it doesn't matter as at minimum it puts pressure on dealers (without knowing they were ratted out), </quote> Again, their "dealer" is likely some fucking nobody who buys and sells in small amounts to get by. Addicts would much rather stay quiet and deal with the justice system rather than risk pissing off dealers because dealers will respond with real violence. <quote>Because they know possession won't get them too bad you have to pin distribution on them to pressure them to surrender the bigger fish.</quote> The bigger fish swim away long before any of the street level dealers would ever be able to give out good info. And low level dealers are unlikely to try to sell out the "big fish" because they will respond with violence. I'm not sure you understand that actual drug dealers have little qualms about killing or maiming people who cross them to send a message. One of the cases being prosecuted in one of the courts I work for involves 3 people picking up a guy who stole $800 from a street distributor, tazing him, and beating him with a hammer. The only reason he got out alive is because he was able to kick the driver of their vehicle in the face during the struggle and cause them to wreck. Addicts do not want to fuck with these people. <quote>The US already arrests everybody on BS charges, that's why the prisons are full in the first place</quote> I can't imagine being this delusional. Drug possession is one of the only charges people get arrested for that could reasonably be called BS. Most arrests are reasonably made, triply so for arrests that have a realistic chance of prison time. My data analyst buddy would kill me for not remembering the exact stats, but an overwhelming majority of prison-worthy arrests involve an actual confession, with the exception of robbery. Prisons are full because we foolishly decide to let the worst society has to offer live out the rest of their lifespan instead of simply executing them. <quote> If prison capacity was really an issue, decriminalisation would happen, not harder policing</quote> Decriminalize what? Possession almost never puts people in prison. Possession barely keeps people in jails most of the time. These drugs need to be legalized and sold at a specialty store, the amount of good that could be done if this happened is astronomical.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
PuddingBoy 07/28/18 6:09:11 AM #92:	GreenKnight127 posted... PuddingBoy posted... lmao at the people thinking you should be able to interrogate people in a treatment facility. Yeah, that'll certainly make people want to seek treatment for their addictions. Is there a law that states police can't question known drug users? "When did you start using? Where did you get your drugs from? Who is your dealer?" Extremely basic and logical questions you'd probably want to ask a heroin addict. And if the druggie chooses not to answer......then they are committing a crime. Because they aren't cooperating with an investigation. Withholding evidence. Looking out for their dealer. Looking out for themselves. Hoping they can get away with it all by claiming they are a "victim". It's pretty fascinating. Seriously....had ANYONE bothered to ask Demi Lovato where she was getting her heroin from? Or are people afraid to ask because it's "too sensitive" of a topic? LOL Youre an embarrassment --- 3DS Friend Code: 3308-5843-0863 Town: Virginia <cite>PuddingBoy posted [p:905853271] in When celeb... [t:76844877]...</cite> <quote><cite>GreenKnight127 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>PuddingBoy posted...</cite> <quote>lmao at the people thinking you should be able to interrogate people in a treatment facility. Yeah, that'll certainly make people want to seek treatment for their addictions.</quote> Is there a law that states police can't question known drug users? "When did you start using? Where did you get your drugs from? Who is your dealer?" Extremely basic and logical questions you'd probably want to ask a heroin addict. And if the druggie chooses not to answer......then they are committing a crime. Because they aren't cooperating with an investigation. Withholding evidence. Looking out for their dealer. Looking out for themselves. Hoping they can get away with it all by claiming they are a "victim". It's pretty fascinating. Seriously....had ANYONE bothered to ask Demi Lovato where she was getting her heroin from? Or are people afraid to ask because it's "too sensitive" of a topic? LOL</quote> Youre an embarrassment</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
GreenKnight127 07/28/18 8:39:59 AM #93:	Rasmoh posted... They usually don't though. Most addicts get what they can from wherever. Also, their "dealer" is usually someone selling small amounts with little to no connection to dealers with any sort of power or quantity of product. People don't know where they get their drugs from? You aren't very familiar with the world, are you? People tend to 'have a guy' they text or call to give them what they want. This person usually has a name, or a cell phone number they can be reached by. This person is known as a "dealer". Sure, they are often small game......and get their stuff from a bigger fish. Who gets his stuff from a bigger fish, who probably gets their shit from some shady dude who doesn't speak English very well who has probably killed multiple people over the course of his sad, violent, disgusting life. But there's always that hierarchy. A totem pole of sick individuals authorities can track. And it all ends at the drug-user at the finish line. Cops can catch the dealers by questioning the users. To think questioning users is somehow unconstitutional or immoral.....is pretty sad. Don't you guys care about all the victims of drug addiction out there? Apparently the media wants us to care about them. So why not start doing something about it? But people don't want to "offend" or "dig too deep". People should be asking where Demi Lovato got her drugs from. Who was supplying her with the poison she almost overdosed on. Give the authorities a name or a number. Something. Anything. A starting point. Arrest those bigger fish. --- ~Gamefaqs logic: Q: If it's so obviously a troll topic...why are you responding to it? A: "Because I have to tell them it's a troll topic!" facepalm <cite>GreenKnight127 posted [p:905855876] in When celeb... [t:76844877]...</cite> <quote><cite>Rasmoh posted...</cite> <quote>They usually don't though. Most addicts get what they can from wherever. Also, their "dealer" is usually someone selling small amounts with little to no connection to dealers with any sort of power or quantity of product.</quote> People don't know where they get their drugs from? You aren't very familiar with the world, are you? People tend to 'have a guy' they text or call to give them what they want. This person usually has a name, or a cell phone number they can be reached by. This person is known as a "dealer". Sure, they are often small game......and get their stuff from a bigger fish. Who gets his stuff from a bigger fish, who probably gets their shit from some shady dude who doesn't speak English very well who has probably killed multiple people over the course of his sad, violent, disgusting life. But there's always that hierarchy. A totem pole of sick individuals authorities can track. And it all ends at the drug-user at the finish line. Cops can catch the dealers by questioning the users. To think questioning users is somehow unconstitutional or immoral.....is pretty sad. Don't you guys care about all the victims of drug addiction out there? Apparently the media wants us to care about them. So why not start doing something about it? But people don't want to "offend" or "dig too deep". People should be asking where Demi Lovato got her drugs from. Who was supplying her with the poison she almost overdosed on. Give the authorities a name or a number. Something. Anything. A starting point. Arrest those bigger fish.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Mead 07/28/18 9:00:46 AM #94:	This is what happens when someone gets all their information about the world from television. --- If they drag you through the mud, it doesnt change whats in your blood <cite>Mead posted [p:905856368] in When celeb... [t:76844877]...</cite> <quote>This is what happens when someone gets all their information about the world from television.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Rasmoh 07/28/18 3:33:09 PM #95:	GreenKnight127 posted... You aren't very familiar with the world, are you? I am, as I actually do work that involves catching and prosecuting drug dealers. You very clearly get your knowledge of drug deals from Law and Order. People tend to 'have a guy' Sometimes, but that is comparatively rare. Most addicts get their fix from wherever they can. Their "dealer" usually isn't the same person for more than a minute amount of time. Addicts will often just approach other addicts and buy from them. You also have to remember that these people are literally frying their brains with these drugs, so their ability to remember and track their dealers is weak. Sure, they are often small game......and get their stuff from a bigger fish. Who gets his stuff from a bigger fish, Do you think drug dealing has some clearly defined hierarchy structure like a fucking Walmart or something? Not only do dealers intentionally make it secretive and confusing, but they also get caught, get shot, change areas, refuse to contact people who give them a bad vibe, etc. If it were so easy to track, they would. Not only would it prevent crime, but for the amount of money they could seize is reward enough for any agency. But it's not that simple, especially because it often involves crossing state and country lines, in tandem with all the other methods used by dealers and distributors to obscure themselves from law enforcement. You have a very simplistic, naive view of how this all works. To think questioning users is somehow unconstitutional or immoral.....is pretty sad. Don't you guys care about all the victims of drug addiction out there? Apparently the media wants us to care about them. So why not start doing something about it? What a shitty emotional appeal this is. You're being deliberately obtuse if you can't see why capturing and interrogating people at rehab is a stupid idea. And make no mistake, I have no sympathy or care for addicts. If I had it my way, we'd just start shooting them after a few offenses. People should be asking where Demi Lovato got her drugs from. Who was supplying her with the poison she almost overdosed on. Give the authorities a name or a number. Something. Anything. A starting point. Arrest those bigger fish. Do you really think Demi Lovato actually handles getting her drugs herself? Like she just fucking strolls on down to Tony Montana's mansion and says "1 heroin please, my good man!"? She probably gets it from someone who she doesn't really know, who also gets it from someone who they don't really know, who also gets it from someone they don't really know. All of which are going to be tight-lipped and impossible to find in the near future because of Demi Lovato being a high profile celebrity. And once more, where do we get the unlimited resources to chase what are basically ghosts, on top of all the other crimes that police are working to solve? GreenKnight127 posted... If I had done the same thing as her......I would have been in jail for 20 years or more. I missed this gem earlier, but you are truly naive if you think you would even do 20 days in jail for what Lohan did. --- Miami Dolphins \| Portland Trailblazers \| San Francisco Giants I won't say a thing, because the one who knows best is you. <cite>Rasmoh posted [p:905871103] in When celeb... [t:76844877]...</cite> <quote><cite>GreenKnight127 posted...</cite> <quote>You aren't very familiar with the world, are you?</quote> I am, as I actually do work that involves catching and prosecuting drug dealers. You very clearly get your knowledge of drug deals from Law and Order. <quote>People tend to 'have a guy'</quote> Sometimes, but that is comparatively rare. Most addicts get their fix from wherever they can. Their "dealer" usually isn't the same person for more than a minute amount of time. Addicts will often just approach other addicts and buy from them. You also have to remember that these people are literally frying their brains with these drugs, so their ability to remember and track their dealers is weak. <quote>Sure, they are often small game......and get their stuff from a bigger fish. Who gets his stuff from a bigger fish,</quote> Do you think drug dealing has some clearly defined hierarchy structure like a fucking Walmart or something? Not only do dealers intentionally make it secretive and confusing, but they also get caught, get shot, change areas, refuse to contact people who give them a bad vibe, etc. If it were so easy to track, they would. Not only would it prevent crime, but for the amount of money they could seize is reward enough for any agency. But it's not that simple, especially because it often involves crossing state and country lines, in tandem with all the other methods used by dealers and distributors to obscure themselves from law enforcement. You have a very simplistic, naive view of how this all works. <quote>To think questioning users is somehow unconstitutional or immoral.....is pretty sad. Don't you guys care about all the victims of drug addiction out there? Apparently the media wants us to care about them. So why not start doing something about it?</quote> What a shitty emotional appeal this is. You're being deliberately obtuse if you can't see why capturing and interrogating people at rehab is a stupid idea. And make no mistake, I have no sympathy or care for addicts. If I had it my way, we'd just start shooting them after a few offenses. <quote>People should be asking where Demi Lovato got her drugs from. Who was supplying her with the poison she almost overdosed on. Give the authorities a name or a number. Something. Anything. A starting point. Arrest those bigger fish.</quote> Do you really think Demi Lovato actually handles getting her drugs herself? Like she just fucking strolls on down to Tony Montana's mansion and says "1 heroin please, my good man!"? She probably gets it from someone who she doesn't really know, who also gets it from someone who they don't really know, who also gets it from someone they don't really know. All of which are going to be tight-lipped and impossible to find in the near future because of Demi Lovato being a high profile celebrity. And once more, where do we get the unlimited resources to chase what are basically ghosts, on top of all the other crimes that police are working to solve? <cite>GreenKnight127 posted...</cite> <quote>If I had done the same thing as her......I would have been in jail for 20 years or more.</quote> I missed this gem earlier, but you are truly naive if you think you would even do 20 days in jail for what Lohan did.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
zebatov 07/28/18 3:41:43 PM #96:	I read it was heroin, then I read that they didn't know what it was, and then I read that they made a mistake and it was definitely not heroin. To answer your question, they have good lawyers that none of us could pay for with a year's salary. Mead posted... The legal system in the US doesnt operate that way at all Every individual has the right to remain silent. Choosing to do so is in no way considered withholding evidence. Yeah, you'd definitely be threatened/charged with interfering with an investigation, or not co-operating. You would go to jail, and then if what you're saying is somehow true, that would be a breach of your Section 9 (Canada) - arbitrary detainment, and you could then sue the police department and the officer that arrested you. I'm about to do this exact thing here. --- lolmodhagomi Heineken is the worst beer. <cite>zebatov posted [p:905871440] in When celeb... [t:76844877]...</cite> <quote>I read it was heroin, then I read that they didn't know what it was, and then I read that they made a mistake and it was definitely not heroin. To answer your question, they have good lawyers that none of us could pay for with a year's salary. <cite>Mead posted...</cite> <quote>The legal system in the US doesnt operate that way at all Every individual has the right to remain silent. Choosing to do so is in no way considered withholding evidence.</quote> Yeah, you'd definitely be threatened/charged with interfering with an investigation, or not co-operating. You would go to jail, and then if what you're saying is somehow true, that would be a breach of your Section 9 (Canada) - arbitrary detainment, and you could then sue the police department and the officer that arrested you. I'm about to do this exact thing here.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Rasmoh 07/28/18 3:54:49 PM #97:	zebatov posted... they have good lawyers that none of us could pay for with a year's salary. That's a small part of it, but one major thing is that celebrities typically only get hit with possession charges. Most addicts build up a history of person crimes, such as trespass, theft, burglary, and unarmed robbery. --- Miami Dolphins \| Portland Trailblazers \| San Francisco Giants I won't say a thing, because the one who knows best is you. <cite>Rasmoh posted [p:905871964] in When celeb... [t:76844877]...</cite> <quote><cite>zebatov posted...</cite> <quote>they have good lawyers that none of us could pay for with a year's salary.</quote> That's a small part of it, but one major thing is that celebrities typically only get hit with possession charges. Most addicts build up a history of person crimes, such as trespass, theft, burglary, and unarmed robbery.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
GreenKnight127 07/28/18 4:46:28 PM #98:	Rasmoh posted... Do you really think Demi Lovato actually handles getting her drugs herself? Like she just fucking strolls on down to Tony Montana's mansion and says "1 heroin please, my good man!"? Actually....yes. I think she knows a very specific person who is in her posse of close friends who she relies on to get her heroin. This person has a name, a phone number, and an address that she more than likely knows. Of course, she wouldn't dare throw this person under the bus and get them arrested. However....it is absolutely ridiculous to think the cops wouldn't want to know the identity of her supplier. And if Demi chooses not to give them up....then Demi is a criminal for not doing so. Aiding and abetting. An arrestable offense. She probably gets it from someone who she doesn't really know, who also gets it from someone who they don't really know, who also gets it from someone they don't really know. Unrealistic assumption. I have druggie friends, and trust me, there is ALWAYS a call center for druggies. ESPECIALLY high profile users (such as Hollywood). Everyone knows the person they need to go to. The go-to guy for all your addictive needs. Sometimes these people even have actual business cards. Trust me, Demi isn't just stumbling upon her heroin, or buying it in dark alleys from guys wearing dark hoods. She has a person. And the cops (and the media) should be asking about this. Because it all starts from the source. All our attention is on the "poor, helpless, emotionally distraught addict".......and we are just completely ignoring the bigger question: Where the hell was she getting this poison in the first place? We should probably do something about that. --- ~Gamefaqs logic: Q: If it's so obviously a troll topic...why are you responding to it? A: "Because I have to tell them it's a troll topic!" facepalm <cite>GreenKnight127 posted [p:905874164] in When celeb... [t:76844877]...</cite> <quote><cite>Rasmoh posted...</cite> <quote> Do you really think Demi Lovato actually handles getting her drugs herself? Like she just fucking strolls on down to Tony Montana's mansion and says "1 heroin please, my good man!"?</quote> Actually....yes. I think she knows a very specific person who is in her posse of close friends who she relies on to get her heroin. This person has a name, a phone number, and an address that she more than likely knows. Of course, she wouldn't dare throw this person under the bus and get them arrested. However....it is absolutely ridiculous to think the cops wouldn't want to know the identity of her supplier. And if Demi chooses not to give them up....then Demi is a criminal for not doing so. Aiding and abetting. An arrestable offense. <quote>She probably gets it from someone who she doesn't really know, who also gets it from someone who they don't really know, who also gets it from someone they don't really know.</quote> Unrealistic assumption. I have druggie friends, and trust me, there is ALWAYS a call center for druggies. ESPECIALLY high profile users (such as Hollywood). Everyone knows the person they need to go to. The go-to guy for all your addictive needs. Sometimes these people even have actual business cards. Trust me, Demi isn't just stumbling upon her heroin, or buying it in dark alleys from guys wearing dark hoods. She has a person. And the cops (and the media) should be asking about this. Because it all starts from the source. All our attention is on the "poor, helpless, emotionally distraught addict".......and we are just completely ignoring the bigger question: Where the hell was she getting this poison in the first place? We should probably do something about that.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Jen0125 07/28/18 6:21:18 PM #99:	GreenKnight127 posted... Don't you guys care about all the victims of drug addiction out there? Apparently the media wants us to care about them. So why not start doing something about it? Who do you consider the victims of drug addiction? Because you certainly have no empathy for the addict themselves who have a disease. All you want to do is throw them in prison or jail. Do you literally only care about the people around the addict and not the addict themselves? --- https://imgur.com/4ihiyS2 "I am not gay! Can't you get that through your head? I am very much aroused at the site of a naked woman!" - Dan0429 <cite>Jen0125 posted [p:905878344] in When celeb... [t:76844877]...</cite> <quote><cite>GreenKnight127 posted...</cite> <quote> Don't you guys care about all the victims of drug addiction out there? Apparently the media wants us to care about them. So why not start doing something about it?</quote> Who do you consider the victims of drug addiction? Because you certainly have no empathy for the addict themselves who have a disease. All you want to do is throw them in prison or jail. Do you literally only care about the people around the addict and not the addict themselves?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Mead 07/28/18 7:04:38 PM #100:	Yeah, you'd definitely be threatened/charged with interfering with an investigation, or not co-operating. You would go to jail, and then if what you're saying is somehow true, that would be a breach of your Section 9 (Canada) - arbitrary detainment, and you could then sue the police department and the officer that arrested you. I'm about to do this exact thing here. Doesnt work that way in the US You have the right to remain silent and not self incriminate. You dont have to say anything to the police or investigators. --- If they drag you through the mud, it doesnt change whats in your blood <cite>Mead posted [p:905880516] in When celeb... [t:76844877]...</cite> <quote><quote>Yeah, you'd definitely be threatened/charged with interfering with an investigation, or not co-operating. You would go to jail, and then if what you're saying is somehow true, that would be a breach of your Section 9 (Canada) - arbitrary detainment, and you could then sue the police department and the officer that arrested you. I'm about to do this exact thing here.</quote> Doesnt work that way in the US You have the right to remain silent and not self incriminate. You dont have to say anything to the police or investigators.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
zebatov 07/28/18 8:20:27 PM #101:	Mead posted... Doesnt work that way in the US You have the right to remain silent and not self incriminate. You dont have to say anything to the police or investigators. We have those rights as well. But it didn't stop a cop from lying to get information from you. --- lolmodhagomi Heineken is the worst beer. <cite>zebatov posted [p:905884087] in When celeb... [t:76844877]...</cite> <quote><cite>Mead posted...</cite> <quote>Doesnt work that way in the US You have the right to remain silent and not self incriminate. You dont have to say anything to the police or investigators.</quote> We have those rights as well. But it didn't stop a cop from lying to get information from you.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1, 2, 3

Poll of the Day > When celebrities do heroin...they go to rehab. When normal people do heroin.... (+) Yeah! (+)

Poll of the Day > When celebrities do heroin...they go to rehab. When normal people do heroin....