Its just an opinion. Obviously some people do like his novels, I’m just not one of em. Anyway I’m not here for hero worship.
You kinda veered off topic there, didn’t you? It’s a nice fantasy, “everyone should get what they deserve,” but it’s not the world we live in. In this world mentally unsound people are out there doing inadvisable drugs and I’m in here with a face I’d very much like not to have eaten off, and we have to deal with that. And you can run a country on that law-of-the-jungle crap, justify it with all the moral highgrounding you want, and then watch as other countries with good mental health coverage and compassionate penal systems eclipse you, while you live amidst the human waste that you created and that you refuse to clean up.
At least you’ll be able to say you got what you deserved.
13 Likes
I’ve never read any of his novels myself. Just tired of seeing someone anonymously and fallaciously tear down someone else at that someone else’s expense
‘Not hero worship’ isn’t what you did there.
2 Likes
Why fallaciously? What mistaken belief was involved here?
As for anonymous, how do you deal with online reviews of products & services?
3 Likes
So you’re proudly a terrible human being and waiting for a pat on the back.
6 Likes
Always. Never. All. None.
Each are fallacies.
2 Likes
There is a difference between a product review online e.g. Amazon, and going to someone’s website to tell them they lack talent at their profession for which they have received rewards from their actual peers.
You may not see this. I hope someday you come to.
Also known as “absolutes.”
3 Likes
Sort of, but there’s a point behind, as you say, blaming it on society. We’ve had decades of pearl-clutching about people using illicit substances. Why, if we let the kids smoke the skunk weed, the streets will be filled with lazy layabouts, fornicators, and rapists! We got to ban it to keep people safe!
Yeah, I just laid out the suffragist, temperance movement argument for the prohibition of alcohol.
Look at the vast majority of us who drink alcohol. We have a safe amount, we don’t get out on the roads, we just generally want to turn off a part of our brain at the end of some days. Was that so bad? But no, our country tried to legislate morality. It didn’t work. No lessons were learned, other than that perhaps some people thought that FDR hated women.
The ever growing, ever more dangerous, list of designer drugs comes from dealers filling a niche, and playing a game of whack-a-mole with governments that haven’t yet banned the stuff that they’re selling. I’ve watched it in my own neck of the woods: years ago, local businesses were openly, literally advertising bath salts. Now, it’s been banned (for good reason imho) and now such substances are the purview of the local redneck mafia. They don’t get in as much trouble (yet) as they do with methamphetamines, so they’d rather deal in the face-eating drugs.
And I guess what I’m getting at is something really simple: some folks just want to mess up their minds. Making things illegal and hard to get just makes determined people come up with different ways to mess up their minds. So yes, the War on Drugs is responsible for creating a market for drugs that turn some people into face-eating murderers.
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.
