opinion of drug dealers...

[WalterMitty]

option 2 for me.

[Rob]

Obviously they're criminals, because they're breaking the law. Anyone who says otherwise is an idiot.

[nclib]

Neither.

[Jake]

Criminals

[Nym90]

Obviously they are criminals. One can argue that they shouldn't be, but they are.

[John Dibble]

They're criminals, and not even close to freedom fighters as opebo foolishly suggests. At best, they could be considered profiteering blockade runners. These people don't fight for the ideals of freedom or anything of the sort - they're in it for the money, often to fund their own drug habit. You'll also notice that these so called freedom fighters haven't even made any sort of political effort to legalize drugs. And for many of them, they'd rather drugs not be legal - if they were, then people wouldn't have to go to them to get them, they could just go to the store.

[phk]

Freedom Fighters.

[Gabu]

Criminals.  The idea is ludicrous that their goals are anything other than to prey on people, especially those who are addicted, in order to get as much money as they can.  If they happen to buck the system in doing so, that's nothing more than a side effect.

[??????????]

Here's a good quote :

On the rare occasions they [drug dealers] 'pop a cap in a pig' I applaud.

[dazzleman]

option 2 - criminals, lowlife scum.

[Ebowed]

To the two people who say they are freedom fighters:

1.) Breaking the law makes you a criminal
2.) Drug dealers break the law
3.) Drug dealers are criminals

Hmm.

[Alcon]

Ebowed summed this up identically to how I was going to, almost down to the word.

To the two people who say they are freedom fighters:

1.) Breaking the law makes you a criminal
2.) Drug dealers break the law
3.) Drug dealers are criminals

Hmm.

[Beet]

To the two people who say they are freedom fighters:

1.) Breaking the law makes you a criminal
2.) Drug dealers break the law
3.) Drug dealers are criminals

Hmm.

Um, the founding fathers broke the law in violating British taxes. That makes them criminals, but it doesn't mean they can't be freedom fighters. I voted criminals, because the "freedom" they are fighting for is actually money and what they sell is mental dependency, the opposite of freedom. But the logic you posted above does not work at all.

[Alcon]

To the two people who say they are freedom fighters:

1.) Breaking the law makes you a criminal
2.) Drug dealers break the law
3.) Drug dealers are criminals

Hmm.

Um, the founding fathers broke the law in violating British taxes. That makes them criminals, but it doesn't mean they can't be freedom fighters. I voted criminals, because the "freedom" they are fighting for is actually money and what they sell is mental dependency, the opposite of freedom. But the logic you posted above does not work at all.

Well, the Founding Fathers were also criminals, technically. Whether or not you disagree that drug cealers are freedom fighters, they are by definition criminals. And because I don't think they are freedom fighters, my vote defaults to criminals.

[Beet]

To the two people who say they are freedom fighters:

1.) Breaking the law makes you a criminal
2.) Drug dealers break the law
3.) Drug dealers are criminals

Hmm.

Um, the founding fathers broke the law in violating British taxes. That makes them criminals, but it doesn't mean they can't be freedom fighters. I voted criminals, because the "freedom" they are fighting for is actually money and what they sell is mental dependency, the opposite of freedom. But the logic you posted above does not work at all.

Well, the Founding Fathers were also criminals, technically. Whether or not you disagree that drug cealers are freedom fighters, they are by definition criminals. And because I don't think they are freedom fighters, my vote defaults to criminals.

Ok, that makes sense. I guess my interpretation of the poll was which role you placed more emphasis on. I agree that by definition they're criminals, but I can see why someone would vote otherwise if they felt that they are also freedom fighters. The difference really depends on what kind of role (justified vs unjustified) they would see drug dealers as playing. In my view it is a wholly unjustified role, but I do think that there are freedom fighters (not drug dealers) in other parts of the world who are technically in violation of their nations' laws and hence by definition criminals, yet I would consider them mostly freedom fighters.

[opebo]

To the two people who say they are freedom fighters:

1.) Breaking the law makes you a criminal
2.) Drug dealers break the law
3.) Drug dealers are criminals

Hmm.

Freedom Fighters are always 'criminals', breaking laws made by an oppressive State.

I applaud their activities, I only wish they were more militant about it.  Up the ante with machine guns as suggested in one of the NRA threads.

[John Dibble]

To the two people who say they are freedom fighters:

1.) Breaking the law makes you a criminal
2.) Drug dealers break the law
3.) Drug dealers are criminals

Hmm.

Freedom Fighters are always 'criminals', breaking laws made by an oppressive State.

I applaud their activities, I only wish they were more militant about it.  Up the ante with machine guns as suggested in one of the NRA threads.

Freedom fighters fight for ideals, opebo. These people are just in it for the money.

[Bono]

Neither. They are businessmen.

[??????????]

Neither. They are businessmen.

Poisoning children.

[A18]

While crack cocaine and heroin should obviously be legal, drug dealers are criminals, and should in many cases be put to death.

[opebo]

To the two people who say they are freedom fighters:

1.) Breaking the law makes you a criminal
2.) Drug dealers break the law
3.) Drug dealers are criminals

Hmm.

Freedom Fighters are always 'criminals', breaking laws made by an oppressive State.

I applaud their activities, I only wish they were more militant about it.  Up the ante with machine guns as suggested in one of the NRA threads.

Freedom fighters fight for ideals, opebo. These people are just in it for the money.

They are fighting for freedom, whatever their motivations.

[opebo]

Neither. They are businessmen.

Poisoning children.

Always on about the children.  What do they have to do with it?  What about a 40 year old man who wants to take some drugs?  How can our country be 'free' when he is denied that freedom?

[opebo]

While crack cocaine and heroin should obviously be legal, drug dealers are criminals, and should in many cases be put to death.

Hah, cute.  I assume you mean until the law is changed?  Well, fair enough - those are the risks a freedom fighter takes in a totalitarian State.

[John Dibble]

To the two people who say they are freedom fighters:

1.) Breaking the law makes you a criminal
2.) Drug dealers break the law
3.) Drug dealers are criminals

Hmm.

Freedom Fighters are always 'criminals', breaking laws made by an oppressive State.

I applaud their activities, I only wish they were more militant about it.  Up the ante with machine guns as suggested in one of the NRA threads.

Freedom fighters fight for ideals, opebo. These people are just in it for the money.

They are fighting for freedom, whatever their motivations.

I highly doubt these 'freedom fighters' would support legalization.

[A18]

While crack cocaine and heroin should obviously be legal, drug dealers are criminals, and should in many cases be put to death.

Hah, cute.  I assume you mean until the law is changed?  Well, fair enough - those are the risks a freedom fighter takes in a totalitarian State.

I mean because of the things that most drug dealers do. I suppose you applaud cop killing, support for terrorism, and selling heroin to teenagers.