beaeglebeachedd

Not in practice in most the places it happens. Much of forested Guyana and Brazil is wide open to ANYONE, no law enforcement and no immigration enforcement.

It reduces the amount of time you are in the residential area meaning there is less opportunity to even contact a pedestrian or cyclist. At the extreme in some areas if you could go the speed of light you could essentially pick a time when no pedestrian could even possibly enter the road while you are on it.

Weed is illegal everywhere in the US by federal law and defacto illegal by state law in most 'legal' states if you are anything other than a homeless bum, as driving a car with metabolites or owning a gun (or just living in same house) as a user are both crimes.

Gun control has gotten looser on state level. Federal seems to get worse every couple decades. It started with the NFA, then the GCA, then the hughes amendment. Finally everything became a felony so they just disarmed undesirable people and races that way.

Except for the things that most affect common Americans. Like how most housing has onerous zoning and code requirements, banking has kyc/AML and reporting, OSHA controls our work conditions, kids families can be investigated for practicing age appropriate child independence, and family law now often essentially makes the higher earner a slave on a short leash to jail if their spouse divorces them.

I would take post WW by a long shot.

Strike that, legal stop

Ours removed them after the guys who made and installed the cameras were caught ducking the process servers from triggering their own cameras and all involved were found to be hypocrites.

Might work where you live. A huge portion of my city has foreign plates or straight up illegals driving, they don't give a fuck about a camera and can, will, and have totaled my car for playing the safe stop fuck fuck game. Nope nope nope if the intersection is clear I'm not getting my car totalled again by the tailgater behind me just to satisfy the law.

I passed through a town in Ohio and was cited to pay or appear to a mayors court. I looked it up and it was literally the mayor's court, and he was required to have something like one day of training.

Immediately decided they'd probably just arrest me on some bullshit upon arriving and if not in a town of 100 or whatever there was no use arguing so I just paid.

The map of the town was like one Podunk neighborhood plus like a 100 ft stretch of state highway gerrymandered in for ticket revenue.

Basically all money in circulation is prior proceeds of crime (and also will soon be going back to crime) and all reasonable lukewarm IQ people know this. It's such a chicken shit law.

Ideally it will lead to a military dictatorship where the population of each country is 1. Whether that becomes reality...

Which is what the articles of confederation were moving closer towards, decentralized affiliated states. It was a move closer towards anarchism but ironically many anarchists would have a meltdown if we suggested going from what we've now to that.

That's one interpretation. Another us the idea that only voluntary interactions and transactions are legitimate -- i.e. taxation or forceful socialist takeover of capital is archist.

The common thread is the idea of decentralized, ideally evenly distributed, power.

The genders are not equal, you're operating on fictional premise.

This is sortition. I would apply it liberally and use it for most legislative offices. Elections and appointments tend to bring out the worst of society -- the kind who actually want power over peoples' lives.

The 14th amendment is a restriction on government. Civil rights acts on private entities involved in intrastate trade.

CRA also expressly allows racism unlike the 14th. For instance the civil rights act allows a business to preferentially treat an Indian in a near reservation (but off res) business while outlawing discriminating say in favor of blacks near a historically black neighborhood.

The military was happy to systematically seize guns from citizens in NOLA during Katrina. They will follow unlawful orders to keep their dental plans active.

There's no federal dictate on how electoral college votes IIRC. Sometimes they go rogue,though it may violate state law.

The 10th amendment was supposed to restrain the federal government to a few enumerated powers. It was gutted via interstate commerce being everything, and you can't give it up because people will start screaming about the civil rights act or the EPA or something.

President, as envisioned by founders, should barely even matter outside of war.

The constitution arguably wasn't designed for a government that did much of what it's doing. Shouldn't be hard to pass an amendment to legalize it if it's that necessary right? We needed an amendment just to federally ban booze for God's sake.

Excellent. Deregulate then. That's the desired effect of this anyway.

It's a valid point. Another valid point is at that time it was known the FDA had a history of approving addictive drugs. It is not evidence based to trust FDA over hundreds of years of history countering otherwise. I knew LOTS of people who turned down or tossed opiate scripts during that time because the long history was obvious to anyone with half a brain.

Chinese emporers were controlling opiates all the way back in the 1700s and the British were tied up in war for 20 years over the wreckage to the Chinese addicts.

The doctors, all college educated, some of our most studied and intelligent citizens, they knew about the history of opiates and im not talking about the dare campaign. I knew before the epidemic even got into force when I tossed the opiates I was prescribed in the trashcan.

The oxy marketing was just the wink and the nod everybody needed to convince themselves to parrot with a straight face, but they didn't actually really believe it.

Didn't we also invade the religious nutsos stopping Afghanistan from producing poppies and then prop up a fake regime that let it flourish, massively increasing the supply of natural opiates? If I recall, the timing works out pretty good with illegal opiate use ramping up.

I've worked in the ER, held a license to work there, and spend everyday with licensed providers in addiction medicine. I assure you I have more familiarity here than even most addicts.

But you win the victim totempole height contest I guess.

Of course, I speak from the pillar of privilege and but am a lowly untouchable on the great victimhood totempole. We should instead only listen to the high priest victims, uncontrollably fented our their minds to kill the pain.

If you want to get rocked on opiates have at it, it's your body, just don't pretend you don't know they're addictive. It's ok to be an addict if you're honest to yourself about what's happening. Might even make sense if the pain is chronically awful.

On the plus side between oxy and COVID distrust is now at all time highs.

People have learned you can't trust the doc anymore than a quik-lube mecanico.

You didn't learn about the opium wars? I'm not talking about dare which was obvious bullshit, I'm talking of learning from history. There was no weed war, that a drug caused a couple wars lasting decades should at least raise an eyebrow of any thinking person.

It's the same shit practically all the way back to opium wars.

Always the drug dealers fault.

I blame the patient. We've known opiates were bad since at least the 1800s, and really longer than that. What the doc said was just what they needed to hear to lie to themselves, but this is taught in every highschool.

I don't sympathize with the violence, I sympathize with a brother being pushed into turning a family member over to be placed into supermax isolation which arguably violated the 8th amendment .

I might be able to stomach handing a brother over to the feds for execution or release to a regular high security prison but not for supermax isolation torture. That's the kind of guilt that lives with you forever, even if maybe he would face other guilt if he didn't help stop it.