You can login if you already have an account or register by clicking the button below.
Registering is free and all you need is a username and password. We never ask you for your e-mail.
People attempting to forum slide and disrupt this board in contravention of Q's call for unity through patriotism may be banned
What is Q related? Anything involving Trump. Politics, Fake news, Censorship, Pizzagate, lluminati, New World Order, Secret Societies, Mk-Ultra, False Flags, Q proofs, etc...
Also, corruption in the following areas...
Government, Entertainment industry, celebrities, charities, corporations, etc...
No Pornographic Material Allowed
Continually harassing users can get your post/comment removed and you possibly banned. Threats of violence against other users or their family members are not allowed on v/GreatAwakening
Those belong in the comment section. If you need help, you can ping a mod, or PM us.
Posts need to be Q related. Not for attacking other users.
GAM is the new place for all things drama/mods/other users pertaining to v/GreatAwakening.
No usernames imitating mods
Misc reasons
Voat Rules
Content violates spam guidelines
Content contains or links to content that is illegal
Content contains personal information that relates to a Voat users real world or online identity
I can't answer all your questions, but being involved in a vehicle collision is substantially different from intentionally ingesting, injecting, or smoking illegal drugs. Although a purist might point out that vehicle collisions are known to outright kill over 3,000 people daily, with hundreds of thousands more receiving injuries up to, but less than lethal. Still, few can arrange their lives to avoid the deadly risk that motor vehicles present.
In your car fire example, the person has no legitimate basis to "judge", in its typical usage, and tellingly doesn't. They would be judging if they saw the collision, and then 'judged' that the driver in the burning car was at fault, and didn't deserve to live.
Maybe it isn't a good analogy, and trust me, I'm totally opposed to drug use. IMO we should be dropping the full weight of the US military against the cartels.
That said, I don't think we should just write off people so easily. Lets do more to create an environment that's drug free (as much as is humanly possible) and then, if they persist..? I just know that all too many of those addicted want to escape it, but its hard as fuck, and way too easy to stay addicted. Lets fix the government/schools/etc... and bandaid the drug issue till we can get the cartels and gangs crushed and dry up that river of shit, then go from there.
Was probably better than my parody attempt in my first comment above. As for addicts, I'm not opposed to helping them in a way that doesn't reward their criminality. Am not thinking of what that might be at the moment. A detox-jail-bootcamp type program has some appeal, but would be very easy to go way wrong with it. Maybe fight the gangs and cartels with the actual military. Lock down sections of cities and root them out in house to house searches. Cartels have vast networks of criminal members and associates in the US, but they could be identified and crushed beyond recovery.
view the rest of the comments →
[–] Tsilent_Tsunami 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago
I can't answer all your questions, but being involved in a vehicle collision is substantially different from intentionally ingesting, injecting, or smoking illegal drugs. Although a purist might point out that vehicle collisions are known to outright kill over 3,000 people daily, with hundreds of thousands more receiving injuries up to, but less than lethal. Still, few can arrange their lives to avoid the deadly risk that motor vehicles present.
In your car fire example, the person has no legitimate basis to "judge", in its typical usage, and tellingly doesn't. They would be judging if they saw the collision, and then 'judged' that the driver in the burning car was at fault, and didn't deserve to live.
Blatantly not judging.
[–] Chasmaniac 1 point 0 points 1 point (+1|-1) ago
Maybe it isn't a good analogy, and trust me, I'm totally opposed to drug use. IMO we should be dropping the full weight of the US military against the cartels.
That said, I don't think we should just write off people so easily. Lets do more to create an environment that's drug free (as much as is humanly possible) and then, if they persist..? I just know that all too many of those addicted want to escape it, but its hard as fuck, and way too easy to stay addicted. Lets fix the government/schools/etc... and bandaid the drug issue till we can get the cartels and gangs crushed and dry up that river of shit, then go from there.
[–] Tsilent_Tsunami ago
Was probably better than my parody attempt in my first comment above. As for addicts, I'm not opposed to helping them in a way that doesn't reward their criminality. Am not thinking of what that might be at the moment. A detox-jail-bootcamp type program has some appeal, but would be very easy to go way wrong with it. Maybe fight the gangs and cartels with the actual military. Lock down sections of cities and root them out in house to house searches. Cartels have vast networks of criminal members and associates in the US, but they could be identified and crushed beyond recovery.