I agree.

Also, the cops in America would be busy controlling actual crime, rather than controlling its citizens through citations, highway robbery, and invasion of privacy where crime ISN'T happening.

Privacy invasion is the only course of action they have in America because they have no other methods to fight crime.

FUCK!

Tags for this video have been changed from 'russia, truck, lada, extortion' to 'russia, truck, lada, extortion, attempted, highway robbery' - edited by calvados

>> ^Stingray:

wheels
Yeah, so... depending upon what/how much they were going to steal... were they just going to throw it all into the sunroof of the moving vehicle?


Yup, think low weight, high value items. Blueray player, jewelry, ect.

at the highway robbery prices of theatres these days, who wouldn't be?

Last movie I saw in the theaters was Lotr2. I simply prefer watching the hd version at home on a screen that I know I will like, at a sound volume I know I will like, with what ever I want to eat.

First of all, I doubt the claim can be verified that taxes reduce consumption. I would challenge you to find any study that supports taxes have slowed smoking adoption among teens rather than increasing dissemination of health facts of smoking, or it just going out of style.

But that is a more technocratic argument. Why is the government singling out smokers, why not people who don't take an afternoon jog? Surly the government should encourage jogging with fines right? Jogging is healthy, not jogging is not, so why not tax not jogging? That is what it means to live in a free society, or in this case, not live in one.

Sin taxes are not taxes at all, but fines. Fines for expressing freedoms are immoral and reprehensible and have no place in a free society. That is why I raise the moral argument. To manipulate government imposed fines to enforce moral agendas is no better than any other form of tyranny of majority will. If that be the case, there is no defense against religious right coming to power and demanding a fine for people who don't pray, after all, that affects their spiritual health.

You assume that just because it relates to better health then it is ok for the government to get involved in, but health isn't the governments job, it's yours and mine. If I don't want to jog, and I want to smoke, you have no right to fine me. That is what it is, it isn't a tax, its a fine. Taxes are something we all pay for mutual benefit, like cops, roads, schools, ect. A tax on a substance to provide a dis-insensitive is legislating morality, and shouldn't be tolerated in any form. I don't argue against the objective however, just the means. I find smoking pretty gross, and would teach my kids to stay away from it as my parents taught me, but legislation is just wrong.

In America, we have ways of handling environmental damage through the courts. And I think there is something to be said about redefining laws to take into consideration property rights of air and water run off. Local communities that are affected by the consequences of local pollution are in a better place to demand reparations than arbitrary taxes that the local affections will never see. That is the real crime. These EPA taxes go to Washington and never come back to the communities they were extracted from, its highway robbery.

On the whole your arguments are completely flat, make no sense at all and simply serve to show that you have no real understanding of the subject. ( you see, name calling isn't very nice or constructive)