Drug legalisation

[eFestivals]

Because it shows that there's more poor people involved at the lower end than there is middle class people with good jobs.

You're simply wrong.

If financial motivation was everything as your idea is worked from, then the poor would be ensuring that it's them that become bankers - the rewards are better than drug dealing, and that bigger take is much more within their reach (on the basis that the 100k drug deal is waaaay out of their reach, which you've said).

Simple fact is that people use the opportunities that are presented to them. And with drug taking being completely unrelated to wealth or class those opportunities are presented proportionally across the population, and taken up in that way too.

The myth is your idea that the majority are wannabe gangstas.

[worm]

Which even your f**kwit can.

Edited December 22, 2010 by worm

[eFestivals]

Anyway, where's this proof of yours that the majority of drug dealers are wannabe gangstas?

That's the part you need to address. But you can't, hence all the diversions.

[eFestivals]

Then the term 'business man' has no meaning. You might as well just say person.

One day you'll understand how language works.

The clue is in the words - it's a "man" who does "business".

Any any drug dealer is doing business, therefore he's a businessman.

Not only that, any drug dealer (unless selling at less than the buying price plus any business costs, an unlikely scenario) is successfully doing business, because they are making a profit on that business. Any personal habits - such as consuming the product themselves - is something aside from that which is not a part of the business.

[eFestivals]

Anyway, where's this proof of yours that the majority of drug dealers are wannabe gangstas?

That's the part you need to address. But you can't, hence all the diversions.

[swede]

Eh? I wasn't on about drug takers, I was on about drug dealers. Crook means someone who organizes an illegal operation, such as dealing drugs. If it isn't legal it's crooked.

[eFestivals]

Anyway, where's this proof of yours that the majority of drug dealers are wannabe gangstas?

That's the part you need to address. But you can't, hence all the diversions.

[worm]

But we've already established on a lower level takers and dealers are technically one and the same, as people who take the drugs will get them from their contact and deal them out within their inner circle of friend. Do try to keep up with me and Neil will you

[swede]

It's the drug dealing that is an illegal operation, not the drug taking. Ergo, the drug dealing makes them small-time crooks. Haway....

[worm]

The clue is in the words - it's a "man" who does "business".

Any any drug dealer is doing business, therefore he's a businessman.

[worm]

Im pretty sure drug taking is illegal as well

[worm]

Anyway, where's this proof of yours that the majority of drug dealers are wannabe gangstas?

That's the part you need to address. But you can't, hence all the diversions.

[eFestivals]

No, this is where we disagree because you don't have the information to hand and will not understand the argument.

oh do shut the f**k up you lying twat.

It's you who doesn't have the information to hand to support what you've said - otherwise youi'd have presented it.

And the reason you don't have it to hand? Because it doesn't exist. The majority of drug dealers are very definitely not wannabe gangstas.

It's also incorrect. I said that most drug dealers are not succesful business men

Why are you making an argument nothing to do with anything I said?

I said it's more likely that a drug dealer will go on to become a successful businessman than have a life of crime - because it's very definitely true!!

and that many are down-and-outs drawn in by the myth of drug dealers being succesful business men.

Oh, so drug dealers are tramps now are they?

I've also said that in poverty striken societies drug dealers are hailed culturally as political symbols, such as with gangster culture.

The same 'hailing' of the successful happens at all levels of wealth and class. It's meaningless empty bollocks.

And none of the above addresses your claim that the majority of drug dealers are wannabe gangstas.

The reason you're not addressing that? Because it's bollocks and you know it is.

Back up your claim that the majority of drug dealers are wannabe gangstas - or admit you've talked out of your arse, yet again.