Easy way to determine if it was an OD or not: just have somebody kneel on officer chauvin's neck and cut off his oxygen for 9.5 minutes and see if he survives.

How confident are they in their defense?

Fair enough, and if you can find numbers that show that, I'm perfectly open to being wrong. I can only analyze local numbers, as those are the numbers that I can find.

As I mentioned prior in the thread, it's incredibly difficult to find hard numbers on underage drug use in the first place, and many of the numbers are based on self-polling, which is unreliable at best.

And yeah, looked up the "Just Say No" campaign, seems it was largely encompassed by the DARE campaign. And honestly, I see no harm in DARE (or Just Say No), and in fact, most liberal minds agree that it's probably a good thing.

The basic idea there is that "A dollar's worth of education is worth ten dollars worth of enforcement." Basically, if you show a 14 year old 500,000 pictures of emaciated meth users with rotted teeth, sunken eyes, and a host of severe medical issues, and explain why it's a virtually universal result of meth addiction, it's less likely the 14 year old will EVER chase the high.

It's somewhat sadistic shock education, but tends to be more effective. I tend to think that the majority of people who believe things like meth, coke, heroin, etc. are literally "evil" are products of DARE education. And that's likewise a part of the problem, when it comes to destigmatizing. However, it has a large impact on why people who don't flinch at prescription Amphetamines or Opioids stay 100% away from the illegal variations.



Steven Crowder was 100% confident. And I suspect that if it were allowed, Chauvin would likely agree to such terms, as long as carried out by officers. The additional damage to the prosecution's case when he came out unharmed would be devastating though, there's no way in the world the Prosecution would allow it.

This post was edited by InsaneBobb on Apr 9 2021 10:25am

When I did DARE in elementary they didn't show any shock pictures from what I remember. They actually made drugs sound cool lol. They described the effects, told us what kinds of places usually have them (street drugs vs club drugs, etc.) and a bunch of other information that made them seem innocuous. Like, tell a kid that people at clubs do these drugs all the time and our thought isn't "this is terrible", it's "those guys do it all the time and are fine, so.... whats bad?"

Showing how bad meth and opiates could fuck you up would probably have been better but they weren't doing that in the 90's at least.

Kneeling on the neck doesn't cut off breathing or bloodflow.

Hit the gym and do squats, you pansy.

This post was edited by EndlessSky on Apr 9 2021 10:32am

Your DARE education and my DARE education were polar opposites then. But Oregon was incredibly huge in both meth production, distribution, and addiction in the early 80's. Meth-related death, dental issues, medical issues, crime, lab explosion related deaths, etc. were already at what were considered "epidemic levels" by the time DARE education started (third grade, so figure right around 1990). Also, DARE started in my school at 3rd grade and continued through 12th. Today, it starts at Kindergarten/1st grade and goes through 12th. Likewise, Crack was bundled right in and sold as "basically the same" even though Oregon didn't really have a rock cocaine problem at the time, and heroin they focused mostly on the overdose video, photo, and treatment. Acid and x, later on were all about the permanent mental damage related, and they brought in people who were turned mentally non-functional by the drugs, and could not even answer basic questions, and were seeing things that weren't there.

I think if your DARE education was more just about what the drugs are and where they were used, that's a failure of the local police who're tasked with working with the schools to provide the education in the first place. And if the police are not working with the school, if it's just school based, then the fault lies 100% with the primary education system you went through.

This post was edited by InsaneBobb on Apr 9 2021 10:36am

How come you write an anti capitalism rage essay and fail to mention that basically all homeless have a serious substance abuse problem which is what we were discussing.




In the case of mood changers or pain relief medication, people take these at their own peril and payback is a bitch as the saying goes. We all know what we're in for if we take that shit for prolonged periods of time.

I already said if people would take drugs without having to rob people to sustain their habit then few would complain. I'm not talking about weed.

About being lenient on meth users I think you're completely wrong. Meth is the devil, take that shit long enough and users are wrecked both physical and mentally, for life.

About Floyd swallowing speedballs, I don't think speedballs will ever be legal and rightfully so. He shouldn't be in possession of that shit. That's my opinion.

I'm disputing your statement that the homelessness is caused by "sOcilIAlisT SeaTTLE"

People trust doctors. If you're in pain due to injury or medical condition, or can't function normally due to mental discipline issues, and a doctor recommends a prescription, most people simply assume it's safe. Believe it or not, the majority of the population trusts doctors. When the doctors cut a person off, and they find themselves once again in pain, or horrific withdrawals, or unable to function, what are they supposed to do, exactly?

If you legalize the drugs and make them cheaply available to the adult public, why would anyone continue to rob people to sustain their habit?

I'm absolutely not wrong. Meth addicts aren't going to stop doing meth. The success rates of people attempting to quit meth are 5% for non-rehab and 12% for rehab after 3 years. That means that even under rehab conditions, 88% of addicts fall directly back into the addiction. The worst thing meth does is permanently alter your brain to cause it to stop producing dopamines in any significant quantity. Thus, depression and a simple inability to feel "good" or "happy" are a permanent side effect of it's use. Without replacing it with something to offset this damage, your chances of recovering an addict are almost none. Something like bupropion (think Wellbutrin) has been shown in some studies to help offset this damage and help addicts function and live normally without the drug, but does not provide the "high". The thing to note is that you're replacing one amphetamine with another. Thus, the ability to provide a recreational substitute that provides a similar "high" WITHOUT the longterm physical and neurochemical effects would be absolutely KEY to eliminating this "devil" in the first place. Yet as long as meth itself is illegal, no substitute will ever even be created.

And this is the point. Floyd ONLY swallowed the speedballs BECAUSE of their illegality. He was facing a felony possession charge that caused him to make a lethal choice, rather than face more years in prison. Had there been no illegality involved in the speedballs, he'd have not swallowed them, and there's a very VERY good chance he'd be alive today, charged with a minor misdemeanor over a fake $20 that would have likely been dismissed in court outright.

How come democrat run cities are drowning in homeless people. Your "sOcilIAlisT SeaTTLE" should figure that one out.

cites, regardless of democrat vs republican are where homeless people are. cities, regardless of state, tend to be democrat. the number of "republican cities" of any size is next to zero.

blaming democrats for homeless people is like being surprised when a river is filled with water instead of it being in a road.

im not saying democrats help the situation, and even do things to hurt the situation, but the whole "democrat run cities cause homelessness" narrative is fucking stupid. try to be a bit more smart idk.