Obama:would you support prosecution if someone died from a past drug sale?

Question

Senator Obama has admitted to his past drug use in his book, many drug users also sell small amounts to their friends:

1) If it could be proven that someone died from one of these sales would you support prosecution?

2) What if the person he sold to then killed someone (car accident or similar..)

3) What if one of the people he introduced to drugs later died from an overdose, would you consider him responsible?

4) Based on #3, in your view how long between introduction and death would absolve him of the responsibility of his actions?

The statute of limitations does not apply to murder.

Answer 1

Good questions with easy answers.  If you take drugs, it was your decision and no one else's.  This has to be one of the worst aspects of american culture is the refusal to accept responsibility for your actions.  Stop looking for scapegoats. So to your first question - the answer is no, that would be stupid.  To the second question the answer is no that would be stupid.  As for question number 3 - again, no that would be stupid.  Can you guess the answer to number 4?  We will not be a great society again until the majority accepts responsibility for our own actions.  You should look closely at your question. You went from stating that Obama used drugs and then inferred that he must have also sold drugs and therefore committed murder.  That is a ridiculous jump in logic.  If you want to discredit the man at least use something people won't laugh at.

Answer 2

To me it would not matter who did the selling,  people not taking responsibility for every segment of their actions needs to be corrected, since the slime will not do it themselves then eventually the courts will need to get involved.

1) If it could be proven that someone died from one of these sales would you support prosecution?

Sure, but the problem would be proving that was the only source of drugs. Was there intent or just reckless disregard of other safety?

2) What if the person he sold to then killed someone (car accident or similar..)

Again the hard thing would be proving it, while in concept the reckless disregard for others lives and safety is no different that handing an automatic weapon to a 5th grader unless many laws are rewritten: how do you know that the drugs supplied were the one responsible as compared to other drugs available. Lets say 5 people supplied drugs at a party were things went wrong: would all 5 be held equally responsible?, what if one supplied pot and the others meth, coke and PCP?

3) What if one of the people the dealer introduced to drugs later died from an overdose, would you consider the dealer responsible?

Personally I believe they are responsible but this would be extremely hard to prove.

4) Based on #3, in your view how long between introduction and death would absolve him of the responsibility of his actions?

While some people say it’s just the users fault I believe the fault also rests with the sellers. This does not in any way limit the user/addict for the incredibly stupid behavior. I would hold every dealer responsible.

The only way to remove the scourge of illegal drug use is to target it from every direction, force the users to disclose the dealers with longer sentences if they don’t roll over. The same would go for the dealers: if they don’t roll over they get longer sentences.

Many of the items you listed might be handled better in civil court if a clear cut criminal case can’t be prosecuted.

  

Answer 3

Ummmm,errrr, ahhhh, that's above my pay grade.