ForumsWEPRDo You Think...

13 2450
PanzerTank
offline
PanzerTank
1,707 posts
Nomad

In shows like Judge Mathis and Street Courts ect... Where people admit they used to do drugs but now they are clean, do you think they should be fined by the police or something? Because that's like saying it's ok to do illegal drugs and admit later on T.V. in front of lots of citizens and get away with it.

  • 13 Replies
Snakebite
offline
Snakebite
996 posts
Nomad

No, because there's no physical evidence. And if they were doing weed, you can legally possess a small amount for personal use.

thechosenuno
offline
thechosenuno
134 posts
Nomad

without proof they actually did use drugs they cant get introuble

SubZero131
offline
SubZero131
598 posts
Nomad

yes i can think. No i dont think they should be fined that would suck. If you were a heavy addict and then quit and someone found out 5 years later would you want to be fined?

PanzerTank
offline
PanzerTank
1,707 posts
Nomad

No, because there's no physical evidence

Yes he just openly admitted on T.V. is it not equal to physical evidence?

If you were a heavy addict and then quit and someone found out 5 years later would you want to be fined?

No, but since I don't do any I'd want them to be fined.

I'm just saying people shouldn't be allowed to admit they did something against the law, then admit it and get away with it scot free. It's like saying I stealing, or killing then admitting it and getting away with it. In this case there stealing and killing peoples lives with second hand smoking.
freakymonkey
offline
freakymonkey
290 posts
Nomad

well to start off why would you admit something like that the police could probably think you have more and could you or your house for the drugs

ColoradoBiker
offline
ColoradoBiker
33 posts
Nomad

No. How can they (police or otherwise) prove it? It could be someone having diarrhea of the mouth that wants to try to get more street credibility.

thelistman
offline
thelistman
1,416 posts
Shepherd

Yes he just openly admitted on T.V. is it not equal to physical evidence?

Nope. I can say anything I want. I can admit to masterminding the the attack on Pearl Harbor, does that mean I did it? Nope. Also, the last thing that needs to happen to a former druggie is for them to be arrested and thrown in jail. If they are now clean, leave them alone.

T3hLemming
offline
T3hLemming
195 posts
Nomad

A confession with no hard evidence behind it usually isn't enough to work in a courtroom, let alone a TV show. It could justify an investigation, but in the case of people saying they used to do drugs, it's not worth the time.

aknerd
offline
aknerd
1,416 posts
Peasant

If you made it a crime to have done drugs in the past, it would only discourage people from seeking help. I mean, if people do drugs for a while, what is their incentive (from a legal standpoint) to stop? Under what you are proposing, they could either keep doing drugs (and stay silent about it) and not get arrested, or open up and enter a clinic and get arrested. Obviously, we should encorage the later option.

By allowing people to come clean about their drug filled past, we let them have a decent future. Of course, we have to take other things into consideration. For instance, if they harmed someone else in the past and admit to it, we can't let that go. Drug use by itself is different because it directly harms only the user.

Holden012
offline
Holden012
1,989 posts
Nomad

Yes he just openly admitted on T.V. is it not equal to physical evidence?


No , The police actually have to find the drugs to actually charge them , If you watch shows like COPS they have to find drugs as evidence to actually charge them.

Anyway this TV show probably set it up for them to say it to get more ratings.
snipershot325
offline
snipershot325
844 posts
Nomad

No! They should be atleast be charged,lt's like confessing you killed someone and getting away with because you said you did it on TV.

Showing 1-11 of 13