Wassup? I am back with some more internal exploration...if you haven't seen my other posts and stuff, well, cool. That's fine. I come from a very...unique(?) perspective. I have very little to no self esteem and a complete fear of death and not being able to live a fulfilling life. However, at the end of it all, does it really matter? Yes, I know I am very depressed and sick. However, I don't think that this is a wrong way to think. Why? Because it shaped my political, religious, and even economical views. Personally, if what I do and what I feel don't really matter, I shouldn't make them matter at the cost of others. I shouldn't go out there and force others to think how I do. This leads to my total viewpoint for practically everything. I think we should legalize whatever doesn't affect anyone else. For example, someone who does recreational drugs can do so in the safety of their own property, as long as it does not affect anyone else. So, if you live in an apartment and smoke up the house, causing everyone else to complain, then no, this would be illegal. Also, if you shoot up some cocaine and think you are safe to drive, hell no. Stay at home and OD by yourself. Or you know, wait until you are clean. If you steal, you are affecting someone else's life as they try to make money. If you want to do certain things, you will need to work for them and earn them the socially accepted way. I have once said the phrase, 'When in Rome...' which means those of us in our country should follow our laws. If the laws are wrong, go through the suitable process to change those laws. But this whole rant came from watching the new Kingsman movie with my family. In it, there is this surprisingly controversial topic. Essentially, people who do illegal drugs are now being held hostage by the very people who made those drugs. With hundreds of millions of lives worldwide on the line, the world powers are to relinquish the war on drugs and allow them to be taxed and controlled. Then, the 'evil person' would be the most famous and richest person in the world while also being socially accepted. However, the President of the United States uses this as a way to kill off all of the drug users who he labels all as criminals and crazies. This is essentially my biggest issue. My brother, who believed it was wrong to have a Deathnote, said he would have done what the President did. He would allow those that did drugs to just die, while trying to appear like a savior at the same time. But, those are all people. Now, I can't say the same for other countries, but for USA, I can say we have specific consequences for certain crimes. Doing drugs does not equal a death sentence. It means jail time, possible volunteer work, and maybe even rehab. So to say, 'Nope, let them die,' I got really upset. If I was in that situation, I would taken the initiative to manage, maintain, and possible control the drugs. Make them less likely to be dangerous and hopefully improve the standards of the American people. See, while I say I don't care, that nothing matters, it is NOT up to me to say YOU don't matter, or THEY shouldn't be cared about. So, I do my best to let others decide for themselves. I want as many people to be happy as possible, and lower conflict as much as possible. This is only because I am a selfish person. I don't like conflict and hate to see such destruction around me. So if we were to come together, then maybe everyone wouldn't involve me in the terrible crisis that is adulthood. Believe me, I have had enough of being a responsible adult. I want to rely on others and just stay at home and eat and sleep. Play games and read novels. I don't want to be bothered by others, I don't want to care. However, if something bad happens in front of me, I can't stand it. Because I want it to not be near me. I am a terrible human being, but that just means I am normal. Your thoughts?
yeah we try to manage drugs every damn day and it doesn't help much. You think you can? Nah bro. You can try, yeah, but dont bother. Also....it is up to you to decide who matters. For each individual person, the world exists for them. The air they breathe, the food on their plate, the walls that protect them....everything in this world exists for our sake. If i were to die, then everything in the worlds--from my perspective--would die with me. To me, it would all become meaningless. Get it? Therefore we have every right to decided what has import in our lives and what does not. If i say you a insignificant little tadpole that should die and go to hell...well from my perspective how can you say otherwise? You don't matter to me, so again from my perspective you have no value. And whatever you say to try and give meaning to your own existence is just you blowing air. Now im not dispassionate. Im not uncaring. Its just that each individual person DECIDES THE VALUE OF OTHERS. And their own opinions are all that matters, at least to them. So you and i, we have every right to rdecide for ourselves who should live and die if we were ever given the choice. So, personally? I would let all them bastards die. Why? Because unless they were forcefully addicted to those drugs, unless someone forced the drugs into them, it means they chose to do them themselves. Which also means they are simple addicts, wastes of space, that simply drag the rest of humanity down with them. They are dead weight that must be dropped. They are infectious, cancerous monstrosities that will spread and contaminate everyone around them unless they are taken out of the equation. People like that mustn't be allowed to bring misfortune to others due to their own horrible life choices. Its insanity to merely treat the symptoms instead of cutting out the disease. ....see what im getting at here? Of course i would never act upon these thoughts. I simple understand that its an arguement many can make. And they wouldn't be wrong. Because its a rather cold and logical viewpoint, isn't it? Morally speaking its wrong, but thats exactly why we can't solve many of the world's problems. Too much morality. Not that we can function without it though, eh?
Dear porn addict, can you just die? Dear gamers, can you just die too? Dear internet addict, social media addict, can you just die? Dear smartphone addict, what have you done? The difference would be the level of dopamine, I think? Meh... If you ask my opinion, I should continue do my own business instead of reading here. Bye.
that's where you are wrong, fam. The difference is that none of those even in extreme cases causes harm to the people around them. They are all personal issues. They affect no one but yourself, really. Others can choose not to get caught up in it. But drug addicts are dangerous, unpredictable. They will rob your grandmother's grave to buy even an ounce or two of crack--or whatever their desired drug may be. They will get you in an alley and shake you down, maybe even shoot you, to get the money to sate their addiction for even a single day. Hell, they might do that even when they were already drugged out. Porn, internet, smartphone, game, all these addictions are relatively harmless. Why? Because these addictions are easily fulfilled within their own homes or on the go. Legal too, so long as you aint into some truly sick shit for the porn one. Drugs...those are both illegal and hard to get without money and going to some shady guy's second aunt's house.
legalizing everything will decrease deaths from illicit drugs, and also decrease drug dealers. The government should even be a supplier.
Hmm, I have to point out that, while taking drugs is a choice, it's not always the one you're thinking of. The perfect examples of this are meth and heroin, both of which are considered some of the "worst" hard drugs. A massive public awareness campaign has made them "uncool", so it's not like ecstasy or weed where you've got a lot of people eager to try it out. It should, incidentally, be pointed out that meth and heroin use are generally associated with the lower class. The choice to use meth is a depressingly practical one: when you use meth, you have the energy to work longer, so if you're a trucker with no other prospects you take it so you can keep your job, if you're a single mother you take it so you can work that third shift and keep your child properly fed. The choice to use heroin, at least recently, was one farther outside the realm of what could reasonably be called "choice": a campaign by pharmaceutical companies convinced many doctors, especially many serving rural and low-income areas, to prescribe opiod painkillers for a wide variety of pains. The companies downplayed their addictiveness, leading to massive over-prescription. Once it became apparent people were getting addicted, it was already much too late, and many ended up turning to illegal alternatives like heroin when they could no longer fill their addiction legally. It's a little gratuitous of me, but I'd say that drug addiction is fueled much more by socioeconomic inequity than some kind of conscious moral failure. I'd question how much free will we even have, but that's a much longer discussion. In any case, I haven't seen the second Kingsman, but the first was very oddly topical in a way that I can see this coming up.
be that as it may, the fact that you can easily become addicted to these kinds of drugs is the problem. Now short term you might have a point fam, i agree. The example you gave withthe mother is perfectly reasonable--but then what if she becomes addicted to the drug? Which is what usually happens. I dont trust people to use drugs in moderation when in situations like that. If you have to use it the chances of addiction increase because its not only a physical dependance but not you convince yourself you are justified in using it, such as working that extra shift to care for your kid. But long term, see, its bad. Because once the mother is addicted the child is going to be fucked. Any chance of that happening at all is unacceptable. Therefore the choice to use it is always a bad one unless addiction is not part of the equation. As for companies downplaying the addictiveness also plays a part too, yes. Though people shouldn't be so trusting anyway when dealing with drugs like that. I dont know, maybe i sound harsh but i dont believe in innocent victims when a person decides to use drugs. You make a choice. You. No one else. And so you should be aware of whose fault it is when shit hits the fan.
I have no qualms about doing the world a bit of cleaning... But It will serve my conscience better if the ones being cleansed are the dregs of society that I deem hopeless,for example drug addicts,serial killers,rapist,people I hate,and so on and so on..... So about the idea of letting those people do what they want as long as they don't effect others,then maybe,just maybe,a non lethal auschwitz is needed for them?
There was this guy I knew in college. Essentially, I was his only friend. Wanna know why? He said those kinds of things quite often. In fact, I happen to be a bit of an idiot as well, so I was actually included in that large hit list of his. Then, he claimed that once he made it big, he would let me go by freely because I was his friend. He was planning world domination, you know. I can't help but remember him whenever people say stuff like that. I mean, he was smiling about committing massive genocide of people he didn't agree with. So...you can call me a liberal if you want, but I don't want anything to do with all of this Nazi/KKK/BLM way of thought.
I don't like nazi or those supremacist talk,but we have to admit that drugs,rape and the likes are quite rampant in the world,so what I'm proposing is basically a compulsory order to be in a camp to detox and to limit their influence to society,I admit that auschwitz is a bad example,but what I mean is basically a quarantine zone,because I did say a non lethal auschwitz that means no killing,or if push comes to shove,extermination i.e. execution
First of all... That makes no sense... And yeah, I don't like rapists, murderers, and people who break the law and hurt others while doing so. I don't like drunk drivers and whores who continuously kill their unborn children. I don't like assholes who think they can take the law into their own hands and decide who faces judgement, too. While I hate those people, since I live in America, I want them to face punishment as defined by our laws. Not because of morals, but because of principles. If we kill off the people we don't like, then who is to say we won't be next? Oh, since they had all those people killed, then they wouldn't mind being treated the exact same way? If we set a precedent, then people for years to come will follow that precedent. This is a purge at best. And if that somehow ends up becoming reality, who is to say that the Purge doesn't become true that way? You know, the movie one. Our actions of today shape tomorrow. What we do now will be viewed by those coming after us, whether we like it or not. So while people like @Cupcake Ninja (no offense, by the way, just bringing you back to see my point of view on this topic) think as soon as they die, the whole thing stops, it doesn't. Even if we don't have family or friends, who is to say that the person working the register at the convenience store realizes you don't visit anymore because you died? At work, we have this chair we made for an elderly lady. We called her to come pick it up...but, there was no answer. And to this day, her chair is just silently catching dust in the back of the store. That is a memento. We leave behind more than we think. Yep, I am a hypocrite. Nothing new there. In the end, we actually matter. Crazy, huh? But, no. We don't. Because I never knew that lady personally. I only know that she died before she picked up her chair. Now that thing is taking up space. No matter how hard we try, nothing we will do will be perfect. Even if we discover a cure for cancer and safely and cheaply distribute it to everyone, we might be persecuted in the next hundred years because we didn't have enough racial diversity in the team. Stupid, huh? What I am trying to say, @Aegis21 is that if that were to happen, people who shouldn't be treated in such a way will find themselves in there...against their will...thanks to the government of all people.
Well of course it doesn't end, fam, because you aint the one who died. Im talking about things in perspective of "me", see. Or you, if i were you. As for things like taking the law into their own hands, that isn't a bad thing really. Human laws are always going to be flawed. Justice is not equal to law. Justice is punishment. When you sin, you must face a consequence for that sin. But see, sometimes the law fucks that up. Rapists and murders, for example, are not redeemable. They should die. Yet many times they don't. And that's not a good thing. No matter the reason one kills, it is still a "wrong". And as for rape it's just a "cruelty". Do you know about the Code of Hammurabi? Those laws, while insanely fucking strict, were in a sense right. They were pretty clear about what was a crime and what punishment fit that crime. In that way, they were fair. Now i know they had a lot of unfair and ridiculous laws too but for the most part it was all about "an eye for an eye" from my understanding. Point is, the law fails. People only caare about being punished according to their nation's laws because they know there's a chance of getting out of trouble using it to their own advantage. It happens often enough. How is that fair? It's not. The way i see it is any person has the right, and moral obligation, to dispense "justice"(punishment) to those deserving of it. Is this a concept that will be popular? No. But it's fair. You say, "well then what's stopping these kinds of things from happening to you or me?" Nothing. But note that im not talking about small crimes like petty thievery. The people don't usually take matters into their own hands for small things like that. Obviously im talking about controversial crimes such as murder and rape like i mentioned above. The real bad crimes. The ones where the fitting punishment should be easy to think about. And the only ones who should be exempt from this would be children under a certain age. I'm thinking 15 and under, after that they should know better than to commit crimes. Hm...i understand that the idea of unbiased and uncaring punishment for crime regardless of circumstance is a tad...harsh...but when you think about it, its just very fair. I probably shouldn't have even said children should be exempt, but im a soft and magnanimus God. Alas, my compassion is too great...
Well...I don't actually care, even if I would act if such a thing happened in front of me. I saw the trailer for the new Death Wish movie and loved it. Reminded me of Boondock Saints. The Punisher and Batman all have this sense of heroism because they take care of the bad guys the law misses. I have a problem with people trying to do these things and then letting it get to their heads, kill the wrong people, or complain when they get attacked in return. Slightly based on the eye for an eye, if we are to treat others how we wish to be treated, then a killer better be ready to die for his actions. A rapist better think twice lest he lose what is important to himself. (I.e. his dick falls off) I don't mind if that were to take place. But just like your arguments against my thoughts, we return to my apparently favorite phrase that people suck at what they do. The road to hell is paved with good intentions and terrorism is based upon a thought that their actions will lead to a greater outcome. So...meh.
True. I dont think im wrong about this kind of eye for an eye type of punishment system, but only under the assumption that everyone actually has "good intentions" in mind. Revenge and justice are not the same. People, too, are flawed. So then any punishment dealt may not be completely fair. Well, not that i really care too much abuot all this myself. The topic just interested me, and so i put forth some of my thoughts on the matter. Needless to say, i get carried away.
I personally think that humans can't change without a strong stimulus,and that humans are inherently evil,mostly because of the experience I got growing up,so I always think of the most drastic and efficient ways to deal with other people. Instead of thinking what other people think,I prefer to think whether the goal can be achieved or not,because to me bad public opinion can be changed,but the result of our action cannot