Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×

Comment Re:Recreational drug use versus harm to others (Score 1) 553

Problem is that people that abuse drugs are rarely able to avoid hurting others.

OK, three things.

First, there's a difference between using drugs and abusing drugs.

Second, this article isn't about "drugs" it's about marijuana. So what meth users do has no bearing on what marijuana users do.

Third, how do you define "rarely"? If drug abusers "are rarely able to avoid hurting others" does that mean that for every incident of drug use there's a >50% chance that the user will hurt someone else? How about >50% for each year that they use "frequently"? Or do you mean >50% of all users will hurt someone at some time in their life? I can't think of how you'd define "rarely able" that isn't complete bullshit.

That's a lot of wrong to fit into just 14 words.

Comment Great idea, but how would that work? (Score 1) 333

How would I demonstrate that the product is falsely labeled? I still don't have a lab.

How would I pay for the experts to testify against Wal-Mart? They might hire a lawyer to disagree.

How would I establish standing? My actual damages are limited to the amount I've personally spent on the fraudulent products. Oh, maybe I get a class action certified! Now I need dozens of lawyers.

Who does Wal-Mart pay the damages to? If the answer is "the class members" you really mean "mostly the lawyers".

Without an agency funded and tasked to do this, it's not worth anyone's time and effort to do it themselves.

Slashdot Top Deals

If you fail to plan, plan to fail.