1 hour ago, eagle45 said:

I don't want lawlessness either.  But if the country is teetering on a progressive inflection point, I'm all for the experiments that don't cost the taxpayer more money.  

Just children's deaths then? Instead of money?

19 minutes ago, NCiggles said:

I think the argument is that legalization allows for regulation.  There is more control and less problems.  

Kinda like booze? We all know how well that works to keep kids from getting it.

11 minutes ago, BigEFly said:

There are models and results in countries that have tried various methods of decriminalization. Portugal is a great example:

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/portugal-drug-decriminalization/

Pot should never have been criminalized. It was driven more by economics than the drug, hemp v cotton.  Largest hemp farmer in America in 1776, George Washington. The founders may have been stoned as well as drunk (water wasn’t safe to drink).

Don't care about pot

14 hours ago, Iggles_Phan said:

We've said that since 2017... 

It's pretty sad that we've been saying that for years now

1 hour ago, Cliftoma said:

The military has been voting by mail since the Civil War.  I really don't see the issue.  It seems that the opposition just wants to have less turnout since people won't want to stand in line.    

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-election/how-do-you-know-voting-mail-works-u-s-military-n1186926

Isn't the military tracked though? They have IDs for each person and even dependents get them

16 minutes ago, NCiggles said:

 

Well people are looking.  There are people at the polling places to verify voter information.  There have been I think less than 100 cases where people have been indicted for some sort of voter fraud vs. the more 150 million people voting.  https://www.brennancenter.org/sites/default/files/analysis/Briefing_Memo_Debunking_Voter_Fraud_Myth.pdf It's just not an issue. 

https://www.star-telegram.com/news/state/texas/article225094315.html

 

I'll see your 100 and raise you 58,000

24 minutes ago, NCiggles said:

In NC, it's the black churches that are taking the black voters to the polls in NC.  

I'm fine with that. I really don't care how they vote as long as they are doing it legally

Read the thread title

🤦🏻‍♂️

2 hours ago, BDawk_ASamuel said:

Based purely on the principal of the virus, were you okay with 100,000 people in the streets this past weekend? 

Yes but if you go back and read my earlier posts on the virus, I always favored the herd immunity approach with precautions.  The high levels asymptomatic and mild symptoms of positive tests suggests some validity to a herd immunity with precautions (social distancing when possible, masks and good hygiene practices).  

1 minute ago, PrinceKelby said:

Read the thread title

🤦🏻‍♂️

As long as we're having respectful disagreements talking about these things is much better than letting them boil over.

I haven't seen any nasty or disrespectful posts.

Besides if we only talked about football right now the thread would have about 20 posts

2 hours ago, eagle45 said:

Sure, let's just have our elections on the honors system.  

 

It has been that way for most of our lives.  I won’t say there wasn’t some fraud but it isn’t and never has been prominent.  I lived in the Jim Crow south.  That is far worse.  

4 minutes ago, BigEFly said:

Yes but if you go back and read my earlier posts on the virus, I always favored the herd immunity approach with precautions.  The high levels asymptomatic and mild symptoms of positive tests suggests some validity to a herd immunity with precautions (social distancing when possible, masks and good hygiene practices).  

I live about 50 miles south of Lake of the Ozarks where that party happened. Camden county has reported no additional cases of Coronavirus since the story broke

Of course it was reported locally that many of the partiers were from the St. Louis area

5 minutes ago, greend said:

 

Sorry but I don't believe it

I get it.  It's a very difficult topic to digest, especially since anyone over the age of 30 has been (pretty much) programmed to "just say no" to drugs and that the war on drugs saves lives.  It's been that way since Nixon and Reagan & Bush doubled and tripled down on it, respectively. I think at the time, those presidents meant well in promoting and funding the war on drugs but over time, as the data pours in, it's beyond obvious it's a losing battle and one that can never be won; especially using the current methods. 

The biggest issue, above all, is viewing drug use as a crime vs. a disorder or a disease.  As long as you view drug use as a crime (as a society) vs what it truly is....a disorder/disease, you will never beat it/control it; because you don't even know what you're fighting against.   

When I first studied the topic of decriminalization in one of my criminal justice classes at Penn State (Taught by a professor who was also in law enforcement), it came as a shock to me that it seemed as if my professor was advocating for the decriminalization of drugs.  I basically thought, "There's no way this cop is telling us that decriminalization has benefits, is he?"  And yet, he presented mountains of evidence in support of decriminalization  (This was back in 1999) which since then, has been proven over and over again...not just in studies but in real-world scenarios; in countries like Portugal and Holland...that's just to name a few. 

If you really want to save lives, I highly recommend keeping an open mind about the subject and if you have time, read up on it.  You might just surprise yourself.

 

 

 

 

3 hours ago, ToastJenkins said:

the plural of anecdote isnt data...

mail in is far easier to corrupt. in person, with ID, is the best way

Is it. It is far easier to get a duplicate or fraudulent driver’s license than a fraudulent mail in ballot. 

Why are protests with thousands  of people okay as well as spitting at cops but not haircuts or going to work?  You know coronavirus and all?

11 minutes ago, PrinceKelby said:

Read the thread title

🤦🏻‍♂️

 

8 minutes ago, Asg 15 said:

As long as we're having respectful disagreements talking about these things is much better than letting them boil over.

I haven't seen any nasty or disrespectful posts.

Besides if we only talked about football right now the thread would have about 20 posts

 

When the best football game to watch on tv is some Super Bowl from the 80's, then this is what we get.  The blog should get back to normal once we actually have something to talk about in relation to football or the Eagles. 

1 minute ago, Ace Nova said:

 

 

When the best football game to watch on tv is some Super Bowl from the 80's, then this is what we get.  The blog should get back to normal once we actually have something to talk about in relation to football or the Eagles. 

I tried starting a defensive tackle conversation but that didn't gain much traction ha.

If dak deserves 37 than so does cousins 

21 minutes ago, BigEFly said:

Yes but if you go back and read my earlier posts on the virus, I always favored the herd immunity approach with precautions.  The high levels asymptomatic and mild symptoms of positive tests suggests some validity to a herd immunity with precautions (social distancing when possible, masks and good hygiene practices).  

We're on the same page here. I was more so referring to people who had an issue with those going out to restaurants, beaches, protesting for their business to open up and then not batting an eye with thousands of people in the streets protesting this weekend. If you pick a side, stay with it. Don't say "Well those people get a pass because it's for a good cause." The virus doesn't choose who and who not to infect based on morals or justice. 

1 hour ago, Asg 15 said:

You're comparing apples and oranges

First voting in the military is by absentee ballot. You have to request a ballot from your home state.

Second, since you're on the active duty roster they have a pretty good idea that you're actually alive and therefore eligible to vote. Too many states don't purge their voting rolls of the dead and those who have moved out or state. If they would be required to do that it would be a good start in convincing people that mail in voting is feasible.

First, voting by mail, you have to request a ballot from your home state. 

Second, do you really think states have access to the active duty roster?  They do have access to the Social Security index and their own tax rolls.  Would be relatively easy for states and the post office to share change of address and driver’s license details. 

Third, mail fraud is an additional crime to voter fraud.  I have yet to see any proof of widespread voter fraud in the current US or of mail fraud.   The recent commission also failed to find it, despite being motivated to do so.  

Im sorry, but at what point is enough actually enough?

59 minutes ago, Asg 15 said:

I have no problem with mail in voting in principle. There has to be a way though to make the people filling out the ballot are the ones who the ballot was actually mailed to.

Right now, I walk into my polling place, tell them my name, I sign on the line and vote.  No voter fraud here, no ID required except the first time you vote as there is no signature to compare.  I think the voter suppression advocates are making people see ghosts that are not there. I am more concerned with voter machine failure than Americans gaming actual ballots. 

8 minutes ago, BigEFly said:

First, voting by mail, you have to request a ballot from your home state. 

Second, do you really think states have access to the active duty roster?  They do have access to the Social Security index and their own tax rolls.  Would be relatively easy for states and the post office to share change of address and driver’s license details. 

Third, mail fraud is an additional crime to voter fraud.  I have yet to see any proof of widespread voter fraud in the current US or of mail fraud.   The recent commission also failed to find it, despite being motivated to do so.  

So you're saying that mail in voting will have the same requirement to request a ballot  as  absentee? If that's the case, that's ok.

I have read a number of articles where some states where they want to mail ballots to anyone whether they request it or not

24 minutes ago, BigEFly said:

Yes but if you go back and read my earlier posts on the virus, I always favored the herd immunity approach with precautions.  The high levels asymptomatic and mild symptoms of positive tests suggests some validity to a herd immunity with precautions (social distancing when possible, masks and good hygiene practices).  

Flattening the curve is just herd immunity at a controlled level of infection. It seems like some people think this thing will just disappear. Having said that, New Zealand is saying they have 0 new cases. At the same time, other countries performed the same steps and it keeps coming back. Which goes back to a controlled level of infections until a vaccine, or herd immunity comes along.

https://www.sciencealert.com/new-zealand-has-hit-zero-active-covid-19-cases

49 minutes ago, greend said:

Sorry but I don't believe it

Read how Portugal reviews possession. It really works well and treatment is always better than incarceration.  I don’t believe you can or necessarily should try to legislate this. 

48 minutes ago, greend said:

Don't care about pot

That article isn’t about pot. It is about health. 

9 minutes ago, WentzFan11 said:

Im sorry, but at what point is enough actually enough?

Trump or the protester?