Apr 9 2007, 9:47 pm
In response to CaptFalcon33035
|
|
RedlineM203
 |
Can't provoke me unless your black and a chav. And live in my area.
|
Elation wrote:
The government replacing the criminals as the middleman between the addicts and the manufactures? That could never end well. I never said anything about the government being a middleman. They wouldn't sell the stuff themselves! (Duh.) | |
Lummox JR wrote:
I don't believe the numbers or the momentum are there for marijuana. I don't see how a lack of popularity of the drug means that the harm minimisation approach doesn't work. | |
Revenant Jesus wrote:
Oh no, I'd be screaming at them all the time I beat them. Of course I don't know what I would say. In all seriousness though. I don't believe just talking to anyone when they do something wrong, especially your kids, is going to nail it into their head. They need to be punished in some form or another. Maybe not as drastic as I said, but enough to where they know, they did something wrong (And we know what kind of wrong we are talking about here, like drinking and driving, stealing or some other bullcrap), they shouldn't have did that something wrong and these are the consequences. When I was 11 I got caught stealing a CD from K-Mart. It was my fist time ever and I admitted to it right away. What did I get? A pat down from the police, put in handcuffs in front of the K-Mart until my mom picked me up, a $2,000 fine and 4 weeks house arrest. I tell you what, I never stole anything again. But see, thats the thing. Teaching a child that they need severe consequences every time they do something wrong in order for it to be really wrong, is going to backfire at some point. Because you know what? There won't always BE parents watching over a child, thinking for one second that you know everything your child has going on is ignorance. The key is to make sure that they make the right choice the next time, and you aren't going to teach them that by striking fear into them, beating them or putting them in jail - All you're doing there, is teaching them that the consequence for GETTING CAUGHT doing something wrong is bad. | |
My parents treated me like you would your children. I remember the night I stopped going outside without someone coming to my door and inviting me. I stayed out a little past dark and when I got home, my dad made me place my hands on his pool table and he whipped my ass with his leather belt.
That's not the only time, but I can safely say it messed me up a little bit. I'm a lot less outgoing and when I do go out, I don't tell him where I'm going and I stay out until my dad falls asleep. I also do yell a lot. My siblings are always jumping around, acting crazy, and doing whatever they want and they don't listen to a damn word any of my parents say, probably because they hit them when they don't listen which is only turning out to be a temporary solution since they start doing the same exact thing the day after. I think that your solution should be a last result, and this falls after all of those crazy camps and societies you can send your child to for repeatedly bad behavior, but if you stop beating them down, I'd bet they'd not turn out so bad. I'll never treat my children to a beating. | |
what i find even more funny is that he posted this on a public forum where anyone who knows him or his BYOND key will get to read his this.
| |
Jmurph wrote:
Here in Texas that would be a criminal offense. Leaving the scene without at least leaving contact info is generally considered a "hit and run" and subject to penalties in most states AFAIK. We also have a 3 strike rule with DWIs in the Lonestar State. Yeah, I live in Illinois. They explained it to me like it was a felony. | |
well, if you were drinking at all, you shouldnt even have the keys in your possession.
| |
The problem is that the legalization of drugs is a very broad thing. If you legalized drugs what ones would be legal and what ones wouldn't be? What changes would you need to make to the drugs to make them legal?
What a lot of people fail to realise is that you can't legalise what's on the streets. Most pills are just as dangerous as the rat poison when used over long periods of time. So you can't say 'hey, no rat poison' while saying yes to everything else that's in there. Anything that could be made to any safe/legal standard would be such a poor imitation that it would only appeal to kids with fake IDs and the sorts of people who wouldn't even try drugs otherwise. The only real benefit I can see is that people wont be afraid to get the proper help when accidents happen. I'm not really against weed. I think it's dumb and it has it's problems but it's not smack. Stoners in public aren't so bad but their second hand smoke could cause some real problems. With the drug listed as illegal they're forced to keep the actual smoking of it away from the public. If they do smoke in public they don't leave anything dangerous behind. So overall I think it works best for everyone if it's on the illegal substance list (at least here in Australia where the consequences for getting busted with it aren't very bad). Looking at the historical evidence With the advancements in drug production we aren't facing the same drugs. Modern drugs are engineered to be what were considered (until recently) super drugs. Highly addictive doesn't even begin to describe some of this stuff. Probably the biggest difference between now and other points in history is that junkies can survive now. Previously if you ran your life into the ground with drugs that was the end. A self destructive lifestyle that doesn't end begins to destroy the lives around it. but they tried Prohibition. The only time I want to see prohibition come back is in the 2020's. Even then it's just so I can say I ran a speak-easy back in the 20's. | |
Actually... I backed my truck up into a car at my college. The back of my truck to the front of their car.
Cost me less than $200 to fix my truck, and cost them... I forget how many thousands(I guess by me and them I mean insurance, but still). I thought it was absurd, but damage to the front-end body of a vehicle is very expensive. | |
How much would you love that plan if your parents were caught with alcohol? Stamping out "crime" means absolutely nothing as a goal, since the criminality of an act is incidental to it being right or wrong. We could also stamp out crime by making everything legal... no laws, no crimes. Since you seem to think torture and brutal killing are okay so long as no laws are being broken, what say we just do that? I'm sure you wouldn't be complaining when somebody came along and killed you for the fun of it, since it's not a crime.
| |
I... I don't know what to say to that. You're absolutely right.
There's no way to defend my view of capital punishment and horrific torture for the most trivial of crimes. I guess that's why you'd be the first on My List when I come to power. :) | |
That's probably the only way I'd ever accept drugs- if it was a private thing. And considering in the UK you pretty much have to smoke cigarettes in private now, that's what it'd be like for weed too.
Look at the laws on sex: it's fine as long as you're not getting down to it on a park bench in town- and no one complains. Pretty much the entire reason why I'm so opposed to any kind of drug legalisation is that I actually have a phobia of drugs. The very thought of them makes me nauseous and sick- which is why my opposition to them is mainly an irrational one, not a rational one (although I do agree with many rational arguments versus drugs. For example, nobody drives or works well when under the influence of any drugs- except maybe caffeine.). So if you were to debate with me over the issue of drugs legalisation you'd get the same amount of intelligent discussion out of me as you would a christian when debating the existence of God (no offense Iainperegrine, although I've not seen you around here for ages. You're the only good christian anyway). So I'll continue to opposite it dogmatically knowing full well that those such as Crispy maybe just *do* have a point. It terrifies me of course- and if headway is ever made in the direction of legalising something such as weed I'll just have to pack it in knowing I'm about as right as someone who believes black people shouldn't vote, just because. I'll have to keep my distance and say, "okay, yeah- do it in your own homes or even in public if need be, but I'm keeping away". Maybe I can use some kind of double-think thing to stop me from wretching every time I see another human being. Erk, sorry for the rant. | |
CaptFalcon33035 wrote:
My parents treated me like you would your children. I remember the night I stopped going outside without someone coming to my door and inviting me. I stayed out a little past dark and when I got home, my dad made me place my hands on his pool table and he whipped my ass with his leather belt. You know, when I talk about some sort of extreme exercise on children, I would generally hope that people would know I was joking about brutally beating children. Instead suddenly people think I am like pro-child beating. The fact is, I don't think children should be hurt at all in the very least. I don't think anyone should be hurt and I don't think anyone has the right to inflict pain on any other person. That being said, I am still a firm believer in punishing a child when they do something wrong. Be it grounding them, sending them to the corner or biting the tips of their noses off. (See, I was joking there, I don't think you should bite kids.) It is easy enough for you to say, explain to them what they did was wrong. But you are simply showing them they can get away with what they want because there is no direct reaction to their own actions. They need to learn what they did was unacceptable and I don't believe words alone will help polish that idea. Also, I think your Dad didn't hit you enough. I would have used like the dull blade of my machete. | |
Crispy wrote:
Lummox JR wrote: Oh, I'm not saying it won't work; I'm just saying you can't rule out that prohibiting it would be effective (whether more or less effective). It's not the same as prohibiting alcohol. Prohibition didn't work for a lot of reasons that don't apply to other things. Lummox JR | |
I think you'll find Elly was being satirical. Swift didn't really think people should eat babies, you know?
| |
Knifo wrote:
Not only does he hit and run with his car, but he hits and runs with his posts, too! :P | |