Philippine President Rodrigo Tells Jobless Filipinos to Kill Drug Addicts

The guy is talking about eating people's livers.
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/storie...ME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2017-04-23-08-35-41

 

I'd like to see some evidence of that claim.

 

What about personal responsibility? Some of these pharmaceuticals can be priceless godsends when used correctly. But now you want to punish the CEOs of pharmaceutical companies because of the people who abuse prescription drugs? That would be like blaming a gun manufacturer when someone uses a gun in a murder. Why not put the blame where it belongs - at the feet of the people abusing the products.

 

The addicts are the victims? What about personal responsibility? Likewise, if the addicts 'disappeared' maybe the dealers would have to reform.

 

the rights war on drugs.. sad!

 

I would prefer the all be executed after due process (a trial), but they're killers just as drug dealers are killers so no real loss.
Terrorists, regardless of them being Catholics in Ireland, Muslims in the middle east or American CIA murderers are all pretty much the same set, all murdering civilians for their bent version of the truth.
I would prefer due process of law but it's their country and their rules and, let us be honest, if they're out to kill innocent people they make themselves fair game.
Imagine if someone has managed to kill that idiot terrorist who murdered in London such a short time ago, that person would have saved the lives of innocent people so I won't condemn Duterte for taking out the trash in his own country under his laws.
I see the police here (Indonesia) are killing terrorists and there's no outcry at all from the public. These people have weapons are are shooting at cops and civilians so, in a nutshell, tough luck if they get a bullet.
Am I supporting Duterte? Yes - his country, his rules.
Do I suggest you go terrorist and drug dealer hunting in your country? No, unless the law allows it.

 

It's totalitarianism of the sort that some conservatives eat up.

 

Of course, government statutes inform your morality.

I'd be in favor of a law to hunt down and exile all War on Drug enforcers and proponents. Maybe to an island somewhere they can practice their totalitarianism on each other.

 

This would be like endorsing a form of eugenics. You kill off the lesser desirables(the drug dealers) and it prevents addiction from spreading, but generally it'd be such a harsh punishment that civilized society only gives to the most heinous of crimes. It certainly is an more 'effective' way of dealing with it, but it cheapens human life. Hmm. Tough choice, but I think I'm on the path where I still prefer treatment options to eugenics.

 

Civilised?
The dealers aren't civilised so don't deserve to live in a civilised society.
Harsh it is, fair it also is.

 

A perfectly reasonable law.

Start with Trump, add that idiot in Zimbabwe, followed by all extremists of all flavours.
Past fools who started wars for money such as Blair can join them.
However, our friend in the Philippines is doing a good job so perhaps I'd let him hang around for a while.
He might well be a nut job but at least he's a nut job who keeps his election promises and is doing something good for the people who voted him in.

 

The War On Drugs here in the U.S. started with the Congressional Black Caucus demanding Nixon 'clean up the black neighborhoods', where police enforcement of drug dealing was almost non-existent in places like Chicago and NYC's black neighborhoods. Then they turned around later and whined and pretended it was all 'Whitey's idea n stuff'; typical half-wit hypocrites who will never assume any responsibility for their own BS, just as black 'culture' does today, encouraging violent gangsterism and drug use. Let them wallow in it.

 

You obviously have no knowledge of how addiction works. Read https://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/drugfacts/understanding-drug-use-addiction to understand it better.

 

I know because I've seen it so many times.
A weak minded idiot tries drugs, gets hooked then ruins his/her life and those of everyone around them.
Saved you reading a long, boring load of rubbish,

Say, "Thank you, Fred".

 

Addicting people is probably the most heinous crime that exists.

 

Have the pro drug dealer lot ever seen what their victims get up to in order to get their fix?I've seen them doing everything from shoplifting, through beating up old ladies to bending over for a poof to get up their backside (I saw that when I smashed down the door of a drug den to get the little B*rd who had just smashed my girlfriend's car window and pinched the stereo - I wish I hadn't).

The reality of drug use is pretty nasty so I don't believe the dealers should be allowed to live.

 

Ah yes, you don't need to read any of that newfangled sciency stuff, it's all alternative facts anyway. If granddaddy didn't learn it, it ain't worth learnin'. Of course the rest of us live in the 21st century, and know that most addiction has a physiological basis.

 

The method of production and supply isn't under discussion here, it's more about the consumer end of the process, so I submit the 'deflection' attempt is yours? Indeed you seem to be more worried about the welfare of the murderous scum who dole out the various narcotics than the victims they're doled out to, and I find it decidedly strange.

 

A very emotive word is 'eugenics'; I prefer to look at it as ridding society of murderers, because that's what dealers are.

 

Typically pretentious liberal waffle (and couched rather sarcastically, if you don't mind my saying) which will solve nothing.

 

Oh spare me the liberal crap - of course punishment is control: if punishment is punitive enough it'll stop any activity, and an activity which destroys young lives is worth stopping.

Yes, considering the vast amount of money involved you're probably right: but you only have to read Frederick Forsyth's book The Cobra to realise how impossible it would be to achieve. There are too many in the top echelons of government who would have too much to lose if supply were to be eradicated. No, the answer is to keep it simple, and keep it quiet, not complicate it with recondite liberal laws. But if you reckon you're up to the job of taking them on, then good luck with that.

 

I'm glad your sarcasm detector is working, however, science is not "pretentious liberal waffle" and there really is a physiological component to addiction.

 

That's true, it's just that I'd prefer that the dealers 'disappeared'. (and we all know what I mean when I use the word 'disappear'?) then there wouldn't be any more addicts. I don't know about yourself but I was once addicted to tobacco, so technically I'm a reformed sinner myself.

 

You have to take the drug to become addicted to it--what is so hard to understand here?

 

As is proved day after day by the garbage NASA puts out, there's science and there's fake science. No prize for guessing which one NASA comes under.