Comments by "Eli Nope" (@elinope4745) on "French Police Killing Sparks Riots" video.

  1. I am torn on this. The guy was shot for fleeing police. He was suspected of drug dealing. I disagree with most laws against drugs, since in effect they just create black markets and a monopoly for big pharma which then turns around and corrupts the government with its profits. The guy was also involved in a violent robbery, which I condemn. I think the violence comes with the black market though, and I blame such violence on the laws that force things into black markets, such laws create a demand for private policing and that in turn brings illegal violence. At the same time, this guy was involved with violent crimes, and he was obviously a threat to public welfare. The community reaction to this shows that the community is not well assimilated, and perhaps the entire neighborhood should be deported.
    4
  2. Drug laws aren't meant to protect us from violence, they are meant to curb our liberty. Assault and murder laws are meant to protect us from violence. Drug laws necessitate illegal police forces within black markets. Illegal police forces are using the same type of violence that legal police forces use without the state backing. As such, drug laws necessitate violence within black markets and that violence is akin to the same violence that the state uses. If laws are meant to protect us from violence, then how come they must be enforced with violence? Food for thought. I know the answer, but once you answer it you will see why black markets also require violence.
    1
  3. Spagg Trait You realize that with no laws there is no crime right? Crimes cannot exist without laws. If drugs were legal they would not be in a black market. If drugs were not in a black market there would be less violence. The violence that occurs in black markets selling drugs would not occur if the drugs were legal. The laws against drugs cause black market violence. Remove the law and the violence goes away. Do you understand cause and effect?
    1
  4. By definition no less. Crimes are when you break the law. No laws, no crime.
    1
  5. Consider this example. Two people, A and B, perform the same action X. In person A's country, action X is illegal, but in person B's area there are no laws against action X. Person A has committed a crime, while person B has not. Without laws there are no crimes.
    1
  6. No you did not. Although I would not like you doing that to people.
    1
  7. My original comment was that I opposed laws against drugs. None of the things you mentioned are drugs. I condemn violent action and violation of property. But law enforcement itself is violent action, therefor all laws are to a small degree wrong, the evils they prevent must outweigh the evil of the law itself. In the case of drug laws, they not only don't prevent enough evil, they actively encourage evil that would have otherwise not existed.
    1
  8. Paul Grist keeping it illegal is what pays those cartels. If marijuana had the legal status of tomatoes then it wouldn't cost enough to fund a cartel. When alcohol was illegal there were violent drug cartels for it. It is legal now and there are no violent cartels for it. Marijuana is sold to kids in school, whisky is not.
    1
  9. Paul Grist More people drink beer than corn liquor or bathtub gin. But when alcohol is illegal more people drink bathtub gin then beer. Big pharma sells the most addictive narcotics.
    1