Donald Trump says US should consider giving drug dealers death penalty

  • Thread starter Thread starter MonteRCMS
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
President Trump repeated his suggestion today March 19, 2018 in New Hampshire.


click here google youtube trump drug dealers

Please keep in mind that these drug situations are major crimes already, involving improper prescriptions, smuggling, and selling prohibited substances; these substances are already prohibited and cause vast numbers of deaths .
 
Last edited:
CIA, FBI, Judges, State Department, HUD, EPA, Dept. of Ed. and, basically, America’s standing in the world,
Why do you feel being in charge should be a popularity contest, and the we need the world to love us. That sounds very expensive.
 
he world doesn’t need to love us. And, Trump’s tariff policies may prove costly to those who work in manufacturing or buy items at the store.
The tariffs are negotiations to assist in getting around non-tariff barriers.
 
The world doesn’t need to love us. And, Trump’s tariff policies may prove costly to those who work in manufacturing or buy items at the store.
Yup, they may have that impact.
Many good things have a price impact, like battling climate change.

If we move towards balanced trade, some prices will rise in exchange for better jobs and employment opportunities here, it’s a trade off with long term benefits.
 
If we move towards balanced trade, some prices will rise in exchange for better jobs and employment opportunities here, it’s a trade off with long term benefits.
It is actually nothing but income redistribution where the government is picking winners and losers.
 
It is actually nothing but income redistribution where the government is picking winners and losers.
No, it’s not income redistribution.
moderate tariffs serve to roughly steer major sectors in the economy, and winners are not picked since there is still full competition within the vast boundaries of the USA. If anything it servers to increase competition and investment among US competitors.
 
If there are no users there are no dealers.
Sure, but you can’t realistically expect to kill all drug users, and honestly you shouldn’t want to live under a legal system where that’s the end goal of the law. I would personally hope anyone involved in enforcing such Draconian measures be killed themselves.

Stigmatising drug users will also lead to a host of other problems, such as higher rates of overdosing if they’re too afraid to contact medical authorities.
Blaming drug dealers for drugs use makes no sense.
Sure, and I’m not really interested in finding new ways to punish drug dealers. I think the real question here is why we live in a society so miserable that so much of the population would want to spend so much of their lives drunk or high. Of course that’s not a problem anyone working in law or the government can try and resolve.
I don’t see why you’d think any particular group would be targeted. I don’t see that regarding other crimes. I mean it isn’t like wealthy White kids get to drive drunk while everyone else is arrested.
They don’t get to do it, but they are likely to be treated much more harshly if they’re caught doing it. Honestly drug use is the case where this kind of racial profiling can be seen particularly clearly. A poor black man caught with marijuana is much more likely to be prosecuted harshly than a rich, white man in the same position. Poor, black communities are generally much more harshly victimized by drug policies than wealthier white communities, despite the popularity of drugs such as marijuana, cocaine, ketamine and MDMA among young, wealthier white people. Poor black communities are policed much more diligently to prevent this kind of crime, but to much less of a degree is anyone cracking down on white kids in clubs, bars, flats and university halls. Even looking internationally, many European countries deliberately adopt lax policies on drugs because they know that wealthy tourists are attracted by their drug culture.

While I think this discrimination is partly a deliberate outcome of the war on drugs (a Nixon aide has admitted that drug laws were intended to target black people and political dissidents, for example), before I’m accused of being an SJW I should note that this kind of profiling is a part of the way all demographics are prosecuted for crimes. A woman who sleeps with an underage boy is much more likely to be given a lenient sentence than a man who does the same, for example.
 
No, it’s not income redistribution.
Actually it is income redistribution. The united steel workers will be able to demand higher wages if we impose steel tariffs and owners of steel mills will see higher profits. Those increases in income will come at the expense of consumers who will now face a lower standard of living.
 
Actually it is income redistribution. The united steel workers will be able to demand higher wages if we impose steel tariffs and owners of steel mills will see higher profits. Those increases in income will come at the expense of consumers who will now face a lower standard of living.
Nope, you are imagining things.
United Steel workers are competing for their jobs against other US Labor just like before. Nothing is stopping the Producer from hiring the guy down the street at a lower wage, if Union demands are unreasonable during wage negotiations. Also there is still plenty of competition from non-Union US producers.

At most you could say we are taking money from foreign producers and giving it to the US Govt…
 
Nope, you are imagining things.

United Steel workers are competing for their jobs against other US Labor just like before. Nothing is stopping the Producer from hiring the guy down the street at a lower wage, if Union demands are unreasonable during wage negotiations. Also there is still plenty of competition from non-Union US producers.

At most you could say we are taking money from foreign producers and giving it to the US Govt…
So nobody’s income will go up if we impose steel tariffs? If nobody gets a higher income, what is the sense of making consumers pay more in the first place?

How are foreign producers going to pay a tariff? Tariffs increase the price of foreign goods, consumers are the ones to end up paying them. Why do you think consumers pay too little for steel?
 
So nobody’s income will go up if we impose steel tariffs?
It certainly not guaranteed as you implied.

What’s far more likely as a direct result is that the workers will be able to keep their living wage jobs. Wages would only rise if the labor market for such skilled labor becomes tight. I see at most a very loose connection that is second or third order, not income redistribution.
 
Last edited:
It certainly not guaranteed as you implied.

What’s far more likely as a direct result is that the workers will be able to keep their living wage jobs. Wages would only rise if the labor market for such skilled labor becomes tight.
So it is an income redistribution program after all. If people’s incomes are artificially inflated by government policy, then that is income redistribution.
 
How is a tight labor market artificial? The US Govt is not responsible for ensuring foreign employment.
 
How is a tight labor market artificial? The US Govt is not responsible for ensuring foreign employment.
The government is not responsible for anyone’s employment? That cannot be found anywhere in the constitution.
 
weak answer, admit it, the Govt does have a responsibility to assist with stable commerce and labor markets.
 
This train has gone so far off the rails that it is now rolling down the interstate.

D
 
OK. Thought experiment:

YOU are now the criminal court judge and a jury finds a career heinous major drug dealer GUILTY.

However, the law requires you, the judge, to impose sentence.

So … Judge HereIAm … what sentence do you impose on the convicted drug dealer?

[No equivocations allowed.]
I know one judge, a (now retired) United States District Court judge (George H.W. Bush appointee) who said that if he found himself in a situation where he had no discretion in sentencing and was required by the law to impose the death penalty, he’d resign before imposing it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top