Newsgroup Elimination - Ubuntu

This is a discussion on Newsgroup Elimination - Ubuntu ; Joe illuminated alt.os.linux.ubuntu by typing: > > How's that? I don't use drugs. I haven't touched pot since college. > I have a few drinks on occasion when out with friends. I have chosen > not to pollute my body ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 92

Thread: Newsgroup Elimination

  1. Re: Newsgroup Elimination

    Joe illuminated alt.os.linux.ubuntu by typing:

    >
    > How's that? I don't use drugs. I haven't touched pot since college.
    > I have a few drinks on occasion when out with friends. I have chosen
    > not to pollute my body or mind with that crap. Free choice. At the
    > same time, I believe YOU have the right to do whatever you want with
    > your body. You want to slowly kill yourself with crack? Have at it.
    > Society would be better off if we made the drugs legal, to allow the
    > prices to be more realistic, so that addicts wouldn't be forced to
    > steal when they feel the need. And if they become legal, I'll
    > continue to make the choice not to use them.


    Hell yeah.


    --
    Moog

    “Are you going to come quietly, or do I have to use earplugs?”

  2. Re: Newsgroup Elimination

    Joe wrote:
    > On 2008-06-21, Wes Groleau wrote:
    >> Joe wrote:
    >>> That's just plain ignorance. No one makes it to age 5 these days
    >>> without knowing that drugs will kill you (even for the drugs that this
    >>> isn't true for).

    >> How do they "know" that? From TV? Most people by age ten
    >> are aware that you can't believe everything you hear on TV.

    >
    > Parents, school, tv, radio, billboards.
    >
    > Do the kids in your area attend school? Public schools are required
    > to preach "just say no" from K on. They even have big school
    > assemblies about the dangers of drugs.
    >
    > If you can find me a kid in school that hasn't heard that drugs are
    > bad, I'll point you to the same kid as a prime candidate for the short
    > bus, and as a kid that should probably be required to wear a helmet at
    > all times...


    You're answering what I didn't write, and changing your own comment.
    Yes, I realize what you meant, but I answered what you _said_ for
    effect. By the age of ten (a little more realistic than five),
    most kids have _heard_ that message along with hundreds of others.
    Many of the messages they have heard are lies. Some of those kids are
    smart enough to realize they've been lied to, but not smart enough
    to know what's a lie and what's not. Hence the power of peer pressure.

    --
    Wes Groleau

    A bureaucrat is someone who cuts red tape lengthwise.

  3. Re: Newsgroup Elimination

    On 2008-06-21, Wes Groleau wrote:
    > Joe wrote:
    >> On 2008-06-21, Wes Groleau wrote:
    >>> Joe wrote:
    >>>> That's just plain ignorance. No one makes it to age 5 these days
    >>>> without knowing that drugs will kill you (even for the drugs that this
    >>>> isn't true for).
    >>> How do they "know" that? From TV? Most people by age ten
    >>> are aware that you can't believe everything you hear on TV.

    >>
    >> Parents, school, tv, radio, billboards.
    >>
    >> Do the kids in your area attend school? Public schools are required
    >> to preach "just say no" from K on. They even have big school
    >> assemblies about the dangers of drugs.
    >>
    >> If you can find me a kid in school that hasn't heard that drugs are
    >> bad, I'll point you to the same kid as a prime candidate for the short
    >> bus, and as a kid that should probably be required to wear a helmet at
    >> all times...

    >
    > You're answering what I didn't write, and changing your own comment.
    > Yes, I realize what you meant, but I answered what you _said_ for
    > effect. By the age of ten (a little more realistic than five),
    > most kids have _heard_ that message along with hundreds of others.
    > Many of the messages they have heard are lies. Some of those kids are
    > smart enough to realize they've been lied to, but not smart enough
    > to know what's a lie and what's not. Hence the power of peer pressure.
    >


    No, I answered directly. Starting in Kindergarten (age 5) schools are
    required to preach aout the evils of drug use.

    And peer pressure does not affect free will. Noone is forced to use
    drugs that doesn't want to. If peer pressure were such a powerful
    force, there would not be a single person in this country not addicted
    to some addictive drug.

    I went to school in the city. I have seen drugs, and been around
    people that use drugs. I chose not to. Peer pressure couldn't make
    me do something that I didn't want to do. If someone is that weak
    willed that they can be forced to do something by mere peer pressure,
    society is better off without them.


    --
    Joe - Linux User #449481/Ubuntu User #19733
    joe at hits - buffalo dot com
    "Hate is baggage, life is too short to go around pissed off all the
    time..." - Danny, American History X

  4. Re: Newsgroup Elimination

    Joe wrote:
    > On 2008-06-21, caver1 wrote:
    >> Joe wrote:
    >>> On 2008-06-20, John F. Morse wrote:
    >>>> SINNER wrote:
    >>>>> * Fred wrote in alt.os.linux.ubuntu:
    >>>>>
    >>>>> [...]
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>>> What would you call it if there were people who objected to a
    >>>>>>>> "business owner" who allowed open sales of dope on his property?
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> Free choice.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>> Addictive drugs are not free choice. They build their own
    >>>>>> demand and
    >>>>>> addicts have no choice. They are unable to make a choice.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>> So someone pushed the needle into the addicts arm or tied them down and
    >>>>> blew pot smoke in their face?
    >>>> It normally starts out by some doper blowing a lie into someones ear. It
    >>>> progresses to more harmful dope. Then they have no control over their
    >>>> body nor their behavior.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>> That's just plain ignorance. Noone makes it to age 5 these days
    >>> without knowing that drugs will kill you (even for the drugs that this
    >>> isn't true for).

    >>
    >> Teenagers and younger are taught the same about alcohol. Look at how
    >> many it kills every year. Should not the ones selling or giving it to
    >> them be held responsible?

    >
    > Absolutely. And they are, whenever they are caught. Stores and
    > bars are hit with sting operations constantly to make sure that they
    > don't sell to minors.
    >
    > The very fact that alcohol is treated as such a taboo for the young is
    > probably half the reason they binge on it, though. In europe, it is
    > not uncommon for kids to have a glass of wine with dinner or at a
    > wedding, and they have far fewer problems with teenage alcohol abuse.
    >
    >
    >



    I partly agree. But at the same time how many American parents tell
    their kids it is wrong to get drunk and what their kids are seeing is
    their parents do exactly that. It is the fault of the society you are
    brought up in. Yes you should be held responsible for your actions but
    that is a separate issue from the legality or illegality of a substance.
    After all isn't our court system full of people tying to put the
    responsibility for their actions on someone or thing else? So aren't the
    kids taught you are not to blame?

  5. Re: Newsgroup Elimination

    Joe wrote:
    > On 2008-06-21, Wes Groleau wrote:
    >> Joe wrote:
    >>> On 2008-06-21, Wes Groleau wrote:
    >>>> Joe wrote:
    >>>>> That's just plain ignorance. No one makes it to age 5 these days
    >>>>> without knowing that drugs will kill you (even for the drugs that this
    >>>>> isn't true for).
    >>>> How do they "know" that? From TV? Most people by age ten
    >>>> are aware that you can't believe everything you hear on TV.
    >>> Parents, school, tv, radio, billboards.
    >>>
    >>> Do the kids in your area attend school? Public schools are required
    >>> to preach "just say no" from K on. They even have big school
    >>> assemblies about the dangers of drugs.
    >>>
    >>> If you can find me a kid in school that hasn't heard that drugs are
    >>> bad, I'll point you to the same kid as a prime candidate for the short
    >>> bus, and as a kid that should probably be required to wear a helmet at
    >>> all times...

    >> You're answering what I didn't write, and changing your own comment.
    >> Yes, I realize what you meant, but I answered what you _said_ for
    >> effect. By the age of ten (a little more realistic than five),
    >> most kids have _heard_ that message along with hundreds of others.
    >> Many of the messages they have heard are lies. Some of those kids are
    >> smart enough to realize they've been lied to, but not smart enough
    >> to know what's a lie and what's not. Hence the power of peer pressure.
    >>

    >
    > No, I answered directly. Starting in Kindergarten (age 5) schools are
    > required to preach aout the evils of drug use.
    >
    > And peer pressure does not affect free will. Noone is forced to use
    > drugs that doesn't want to. If peer pressure were such a powerful
    > force, there would not be a single person in this country not addicted
    > to some addictive drug.


    Only in a perfect world. No one is perfect. Even the law has ruled that
    under the right circumstances an insane person does not control his free
    will. Not saying I totally agree with the law just an example.


    > I went to school in the city. I have seen drugs, and been around
    > people that use drugs. I chose not to. Peer pressure couldn't make
    > me do something that I didn't want to do. If someone is that weak
    > willed that they can be forced to do something by mere peer pressure,
    > society is better off without them.
    >
    >



    Hitler thought the same thing.

  6. Re: Newsgroup Elimination

    Joe wrote:

    > No, I answered directly. Starting in Kindergarten (age 5) schools are
    > required to preach aout the evils of drug use.
    >



    They aren't doing a very good job, now are they?


    > And peer pressure does not affect free will. Noone is forced to use
    > drugs that doesn't want to. If peer pressure were such a powerful
    > force, there would not be a single person in this country not addicted
    > to some addictive drug.
    >



    Whatever you want to call the reason, there is something lacking in the
    mind of the person who takes dope.

    BTW, I use the term "dope" instead of "drugs" because I know the
    difference. A person who takes "dope" is a "dope,"


    > I went to school in the city. I have seen drugs, and been around
    > people that use drugs. I chose not to. Peer pressure couldn't make
    > me do something that I didn't want to do. If someone is that weak
    > willed that they can be forced to do something by mere peer pressure,
    > society is better off without them.



    If not "peer pressure" then loss of a job, loved one, lover, whatever.
    It's a serious problem and not something to argue over the choice of words.

    Dopers don't give a hoot whether you call it "peer pressure,"
    "addiction," "stupidity," whatever. They are "doped" and they do require
    the assistance of others if they expect to overcome their addiction.

    You and I are very strong-willed. Nobody, absolutely nobody, can make me
    do anything. I may suffer pain and sorrow, but I do not have to do
    anything but die.

    BTW, the "Just Say No" crap in schools has been condemned by many
    people. It isn't working. The ignorant governments can't think of a
    better plan, or they refuse to use a measure that might rock their boat.

    It used to be a parent had the responsibility to correctly bring up
    their child, and that is how it should be. But the liberal way of
    thinking has turned the tables, making the parent liable for punishing
    their child. Children have far less guidance that you and I did when we
    were young.

    The government has screwed up this world (I mentioned no certain
    country, nor excluded any). The people vote into office their government
    representatives.

    They get what they deserve, eh?


    --
    John

    No Microsoft, Apple, Intel, Novell, Trend Micro, nor Ford products were used in the preparation or transmission of this message.

    The EULA sounds like it was written by a team of lawyers who want to tell me what I can't do. The GPL sounds like it was written by a human being, who wants me to know what I can do.

  7. Re: Newsgroup Elimination

    caver1 wrote:

    >> The very fact that alcohol is treated as such a taboo for the young
    >> is probably half the reason they binge on it, though. In europe, it
    >> is not uncommon for kids to have a glass of wine with dinner or at a
    >> wedding, and they have far fewer problems with teenage alcohol abuse.

    >
    > I partly agree. But at the same time how many American parents tell
    > their kids it is wrong to get drunk and what their kids are seeing is
    > their parents do exactly that. It is the fault of the society you are
    > brought up in. Yes you should be held responsible for your actions but
    > that is a separate issue from the legality or illegality of a substance.
    > After all isn't our court system full of people tying to put the
    > responsibility for their actions on someone or thing else? So aren't
    > the kids taught you are not to blame?



    I disagree in your first sentence -- only.

    I don't know where Joe came up with his "half the reason" figure, but
    that isn't important. Not if it was 90% or 10%. It is not the reason at all.

    Kids don't care how they obtain the dope of choice (alcohol), nor that
    it is even a dope. They just want the dope, not any thrill of purchasing it.

    All they want to do is be "cool" like their "friends" and not be called
    a "chicken" or other name.

    I'd say that defines peer pressure. Especially after you consider these
    kids must be around each other all day in school, and cannot escape the
    pressure.

    Of course once they start indulging, the get doped (drunk), and lose any
    proper training they may have had up to that point.

    From then on it is a downward spiral. They become addicted and will
    require a stronger and stronger dope to reach the same height of buzz.

    It took a lot of people (peers) to pressure these kids into becoming
    dopers. It will take a lot of people to help them break the shackles of
    addiction. Laws are but one way to try and slow down the problem so the
    recovering people at AA, AV, NA, etc., can assist one-on-one.


    --
    John

    No Microsoft, Apple, Intel, Novell, Trend Micro, nor Ford products were used in the preparation or transmission of this message.

    The EULA sounds like it was written by a team of lawyers who want to tell me what I can't do. The GPL sounds like it was written by a human being, who wants me to know what I can do.

  8. Re: Newsgroup Elimination

    John F. Morse wrote:
    > caver1 wrote:
    >
    >>> The very fact that alcohol is treated as such a taboo for the young
    >>> is probably half the reason they binge on it, though. In europe, it
    >>> is not uncommon for kids to have a glass of wine with dinner or at a
    >>> wedding, and they have far fewer problems with teenage alcohol abuse.

    >>
    >> I partly agree. But at the same time how many American parents tell
    >> their kids it is wrong to get drunk and what their kids are seeing is
    >> their parents do exactly that. It is the fault of the society you are
    >> brought up in. Yes you should be held responsible for your actions but
    >> that is a separate issue from the legality or illegality of a substance.
    >> After all isn't our court system full of people tying to put the
    >> responsibility for their actions on someone or thing else? So aren't
    >> the kids taught you are not to blame?

    >
    >
    > I disagree in your first sentence -- only.
    >
    > I don't know where Joe came up with his "half the reason" figure, but
    > that isn't important. Not if it was 90% or 10%. It is not the reason at
    > all.
    >
    > Kids don't care how they obtain the dope of choice (alcohol), nor that
    > it is even a dope. They just want the dope, not any thrill of purchasing
    > it.
    >
    > All they want to do is be "cool" like their "friends" and not be called
    > a "chicken" or other name.
    >
    > I'd say that defines peer pressure. Especially after you consider these
    > kids must be around each other all day in school, and cannot escape the
    > pressure.
    >
    > Of course once they start indulging, the get doped (drunk), and lose any
    > proper training they may have had up to that point.
    >
    > From then on it is a downward spiral. They become addicted and will
    > require a stronger and stronger dope to reach the same height of buzz.
    >
    > It took a lot of people (peers) to pressure these kids into becoming
    > dopers. It will take a lot of people to help them break the shackles of
    > addiction. Laws are but one way to try and slow down the problem so the
    > recovering people at AA, AV, NA, etc., can assist one-on-one.
    >
    >



    Our statements even though they agree show the differences in people.
    both are correct but neither is all the time. The problem is much more
    complicated than some try to make it out to be.

  9. Re: Newsgroup Elimination

    On 2008-06-21, caver1 wrote:
    > Joe wrote:
    >> On 2008-06-21, Wes Groleau wrote:
    >>> Joe wrote:
    >>>> On 2008-06-21, Wes Groleau wrote:
    >>>>> Joe wrote:
    >>>>>> That's just plain ignorance. No one makes it to age 5 these days
    >>>>>> without knowing that drugs will kill you (even for the drugs that this
    >>>>>> isn't true for).
    >>>>> How do they "know" that? From TV? Most people by age ten
    >>>>> are aware that you can't believe everything you hear on TV.
    >>>> Parents, school, tv, radio, billboards.
    >>>>
    >>>> Do the kids in your area attend school? Public schools are required
    >>>> to preach "just say no" from K on. They even have big school
    >>>> assemblies about the dangers of drugs.
    >>>>
    >>>> If you can find me a kid in school that hasn't heard that drugs are
    >>>> bad, I'll point you to the same kid as a prime candidate for the short
    >>>> bus, and as a kid that should probably be required to wear a helmet at
    >>>> all times...
    >>> You're answering what I didn't write, and changing your own comment.
    >>> Yes, I realize what you meant, but I answered what you _said_ for
    >>> effect. By the age of ten (a little more realistic than five),
    >>> most kids have _heard_ that message along with hundreds of others.
    >>> Many of the messages they have heard are lies. Some of those kids are
    >>> smart enough to realize they've been lied to, but not smart enough
    >>> to know what's a lie and what's not. Hence the power of peer pressure.
    >>>

    >>
    >> No, I answered directly. Starting in Kindergarten (age 5) schools are
    >> required to preach aout the evils of drug use.
    >>
    >> And peer pressure does not affect free will. Noone is forced to use
    >> drugs that doesn't want to. If peer pressure were such a powerful
    >> force, there would not be a single person in this country not addicted
    >> to some addictive drug.

    >
    > Only in a perfect world. No one is perfect. Even the law has ruled that
    > under the right circumstances an insane person does not control his free
    > will. Not saying I totally agree with the law just an example.


    Ahhh, so we should make laws to legislate thewhole of society based on
    the premise that an insane person doesn't know right from wrong?
    Brilliant.

    >
    >
    >> I went to school in the city. I have seen drugs, and been around
    >> people that use drugs. I chose not to. Peer pressure couldn't make
    >> me do something that I didn't want to do. If someone is that weak
    >> willed that they can be forced to do something by mere peer pressure,
    >> society is better off without them.
    >>
    >>

    >
    >
    > Hitler thought the same thing.


    No, it was Darwin...


    --
    Joe - Linux User #449481/Ubuntu User #19733
    joe at hits - buffalo dot com
    "Hate is baggage, life is too short to go around pissed off all the
    time..." - Danny, American History X

  10. Re: Newsgroup Elimination

    On 2008-06-21, caver1 wrote:
    > Joe wrote:
    >> On 2008-06-21, caver1 wrote:
    >>> Joe wrote:
    >>>> On 2008-06-20, John F. Morse wrote:
    >>>>> SINNER wrote:
    >>>>>> * Fred wrote in alt.os.linux.ubuntu:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> [...]
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> What would you call it if there were people who objected to a
    >>>>>>>>> "business owner" who allowed open sales of dope on his property?
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> Free choice.
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> Addictive drugs are not free choice. They build their own
    >>>>>>> demand and
    >>>>>>> addicts have no choice. They are unable to make a choice.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>> So someone pushed the needle into the addicts arm or tied them down and
    >>>>>> blew pot smoke in their face?
    >>>>> It normally starts out by some doper blowing a lie into someones ear. It
    >>>>> progresses to more harmful dope. Then they have no control over their
    >>>>> body nor their behavior.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>> That's just plain ignorance. Noone makes it to age 5 these days
    >>>> without knowing that drugs will kill you (even for the drugs that this
    >>>> isn't true for).
    >>>
    >>> Teenagers and younger are taught the same about alcohol. Look at how
    >>> many it kills every year. Should not the ones selling or giving it to
    >>> them be held responsible?

    >>
    >> Absolutely. And they are, whenever they are caught. Stores and
    >> bars are hit with sting operations constantly to make sure that they
    >> don't sell to minors.
    >>
    >> The very fact that alcohol is treated as such a taboo for the young is
    >> probably half the reason they binge on it, though. In europe, it is
    >> not uncommon for kids to have a glass of wine with dinner or at a
    >> wedding, and they have far fewer problems with teenage alcohol abuse.
    >>
    >>
    >>

    >
    >
    > I partly agree. But at the same time how many American parents tell
    > their kids it is wrong to get drunk and what their kids are seeing is
    > their parents do exactly that. It is the fault of the society you are
    > brought up in. Yes you should be held responsible for your actions but
    > that is a separate issue from the legality or illegality of a substance.
    > After all isn't our court system full of people tying to put the
    > responsibility for their actions on someone or thing else? So aren't the
    > kids taught you are not to blame?


    Some are. Some are not. If you asked my 10 year old who is
    responsible if he steals from a store, he will not try to shift the
    blame to another kid, or to ny other part of society. He knows that
    HE will be responsible if he does something wrong.

    Your argument does not support your assertion that these things
    shoulld be illegal. You are using the current nanny state to support
    the idea of a bigger nanny state. It flies in the face of logic. If
    you want people to be more responsible, you have to make them
    responsible.

    --
    Joe - Linux User #449481/Ubuntu User #19733
    joe at hits - buffalo dot com
    "Hate is baggage, life is too short to go around pissed off all the
    time..." - Danny, American History X

  11. Re: Newsgroup Elimination

    On 2008-06-21, John F. Morse wrote:
    > caver1 wrote:
    >
    >>> The very fact that alcohol is treated as such a taboo for the young
    >>> is probably half the reason they binge on it, though. In europe, it
    >>> is not uncommon for kids to have a glass of wine with dinner or at a
    >>> wedding, and they have far fewer problems with teenage alcohol abuse.

    >>
    >> I partly agree. But at the same time how many American parents tell
    >> their kids it is wrong to get drunk and what their kids are seeing is
    >> their parents do exactly that. It is the fault of the society you are
    >> brought up in. Yes you should be held responsible for your actions but
    >> that is a separate issue from the legality or illegality of a substance.
    >> After all isn't our court system full of people tying to put the
    >> responsibility for their actions on someone or thing else? So aren't
    >> the kids taught you are not to blame?

    >
    >
    > I disagree in your first sentence -- only.
    >
    > I don't know where Joe came up with his "half the reason" figure, but
    > that isn't important. Not if it was 90% or 10%. It is not the reason at all.


    You make no sense here...

    >
    > Kids don't care how they obtain the dope of choice (alcohol), nor that
    > it is even a dope. They just want the dope, not any thrill of purchasing it.


    That is generally untrue. The very fact that kids in other parts of
    the world have access to the "dope of choice", and do not have nearly
    the addiction problems of our own kids tells the whole story, not half
    of it, not 90%, not 10%.

    >
    > All they want to do is be "cool" like their "friends" and not be called
    > a "chicken" or other name.


    Because of the taboo. If alcohol is legal, and we teach the kids the
    right way, it loses it's "cool".

    >
    > I'd say that defines peer pressure. Especially after you consider these
    > kids must be around each other all day in school, and cannot escape the
    > pressure.


    Sure they can. Kids do it every day. If kids could not escape, then
    all of our kids would be (or become) addicts. The facts don't bear
    out your argument.

    >
    > Of course once they start indulging, the get doped (drunk), and lose any
    > proper training they may have had up to that point.


    No, they don't. I drank on occasion when in high school. I didn't
    lose ANY training, and when I got home, my parents knew that I had
    been drinking, as any attentive parents would, and they dealt with it
    accordingly.

    >
    > From then on it is a downward spiral. They become addicted and will
    > require a stronger and stronger dope to reach the same height of buzz.


    That, again, is untrue. The myth of "gateway drugs" has been debunked
    in nearly every study ever to try to demonize alcohol and marijuana.
    If it were true, you wouldn't have 45 year old alcoholics or potheads.
    They all would have moved on to coke or heroin by then.

    >
    > It took a lot of people (peers) to pressure these kids into becoming
    > dopers. It will take a lot of people to help them break the shackles of
    > addiction. Laws are but one way to try and slow down the problem so the
    > recovering people at AA, AV, NA, etc., can assist one-on-one.


    And how, exactly, has the law helped? It has created a criminal
    society fueled by drug profits. It has put pushers on all of our
    neighborhood corners. It has fueled drug wars and drive-by shootings
    in our neighborhoods, and killed innocent people that never touched
    the crap. Those laws mean nothing when it comes to availability.
    They only affect who is distributing, and who has the power.


    --
    Joe - Linux User #449481/Ubuntu User #19733
    joe at hits - buffalo dot com
    "Hate is baggage, life is too short to go around pissed off all the
    time..." - Danny, American History X

  12. Re: Newsgroup Elimination

    Joe wrote:
    > On 2008-06-21, caver1 wrote:
    >> Joe wrote:
    >>> On 2008-06-21, Wes Groleau wrote:
    >>>> Joe wrote:
    >>>>> On 2008-06-21, Wes Groleau wrote:
    >>>>>> Joe wrote:
    >>>>>>> That's just plain ignorance. No one makes it to age 5 these days
    >>>>>>> without knowing that drugs will kill you (even for the drugs that this
    >>>>>>> isn't true for).
    >>>>>> How do they "know" that? From TV? Most people by age ten
    >>>>>> are aware that you can't believe everything you hear on TV.
    >>>>> Parents, school, tv, radio, billboards.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Do the kids in your area attend school? Public schools are required
    >>>>> to preach "just say no" from K on. They even have big school
    >>>>> assemblies about the dangers of drugs.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> If you can find me a kid in school that hasn't heard that drugs are
    >>>>> bad, I'll point you to the same kid as a prime candidate for the short
    >>>>> bus, and as a kid that should probably be required to wear a helmet at
    >>>>> all times...
    >>>> You're answering what I didn't write, and changing your own comment.
    >>>> Yes, I realize what you meant, but I answered what you _said_ for
    >>>> effect. By the age of ten (a little more realistic than five),
    >>>> most kids have _heard_ that message along with hundreds of others.
    >>>> Many of the messages they have heard are lies. Some of those kids are
    >>>> smart enough to realize they've been lied to, but not smart enough
    >>>> to know what's a lie and what's not. Hence the power of peer pressure.
    >>>>
    >>> No, I answered directly. Starting in Kindergarten (age 5) schools are
    >>> required to preach aout the evils of drug use.
    >>>
    >>> And peer pressure does not affect free will. Noone is forced to use
    >>> drugs that doesn't want to. If peer pressure were such a powerful
    >>> force, there would not be a single person in this country not addicted
    >>> to some addictive drug.

    >> Only in a perfect world. No one is perfect. Even the law has ruled that
    >> under the right circumstances an insane person does not control his free
    >> will. Not saying I totally agree with the law just an example.

    >
    > Ahhh, so we should make laws to legislate thewhole of society based on
    > the premise that an insane person doesn't know right from wrong?
    > Brilliant.




    I don't agree with the insanity laws just pointing out that our society
    already does. Now much of society has taken lessons from this and wants
    to throw ones own responsibilities for their own actions, or
    repercussions from, on anyone or anything else.
    Also pointing out the fact that in a perfect word no one could be
    mislead,conned, or make mistakes that led them to wrong decisions.
    Depression can lead one to suicide, alcohol abuse, etc. Tes they should
    be held responsible for their actions but at the same time they were not
    in complete control and need help. Whereas if it weren't for the
    depression they would have never made that choice.
    There are way too many variables in a human society that is not perfect.


    >>> I went to school in the city. I have seen drugs, and been around
    >>> people that use drugs. I chose not to. Peer pressure couldn't make
    >>> me do something that I didn't want to do. If someone is that weak
    >>> willed that they can be forced to do something by mere peer pressure,
    >>> society is better off without them.
    >>>
    >>>

    >>
    >> Hitler thought the same thing.

    >
    > No, it was Darwin...
    >



    No it was Hitler. He thought he knew the way to a perfect society and
    that was through the extermination of all those he thought that society
    would be better off without them.

  13. Re: Newsgroup Elimination


    >
    > And I never said it shouldn't. Children are not people, they are
    > wards. They do not have personal responsibility, nor do they have a
    > complete moral code. That is what makes them children, naivite.




    And through that naivet or incomplete moral codes they can make
    terrible decisions, or even be mislead.
    Children are people as much as adults are.



    > That doesn't argue that drugs should be completely illegal. It argues
    > more that they should be legal, and controlled, like other drugs are.
    > Alcohol is a prime example. While I was able to get some beer, on
    > occasion, it was not always easy. At 16 years old, I could get a dime
    > bag of pot, which was illegal for everyone, a lot easier than I could
    > get a 6 pack of beer, which is a legal (but controlled) substance.
    >
    >



    So there should be controls. agreed but not totally legal.
    Prime example. Heroin was legal in China. Look what it did to their
    society.
    Morphine was legal in our society (US). Used without any controls. Those
    addicts became such a burden on the US society that the uncontrolled
    usage was made illegal.
    This is as much about the good for society over all as it is about the
    individual.
    And yes many individuals can bring a society down as a whole.

    So your kid goes out an experiments. JUST one time. He or own of the
    ones he is with drives drunk and kills. That was a bad decision that he
    may not have normally made. He wasn't in full control. Yes he should be
    held responsible but he wasn't in full control of the situation.

  14. Re: Newsgroup Elimination

    Joe wrote:
    > On 2008-06-21, caver1 wrote:
    >> Joe wrote:
    >>> On 2008-06-21, caver1 wrote:
    >>>> Joe wrote:
    >>>>> On 2008-06-20, John F. Morse wrote:
    >>>>>> SINNER wrote:
    >>>>>>> * Fred wrote in alt.os.linux.ubuntu:
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> [...]
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>> What would you call it if there were people who objected to a
    >>>>>>>>>> "business owner" who allowed open sales of dope on his property?
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> Free choice.
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> Addictive drugs are not free choice. They build their own
    >>>>>>>> demand and
    >>>>>>>> addicts have no choice. They are unable to make a choice.
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> So someone pushed the needle into the addicts arm or tied them down and
    >>>>>>> blew pot smoke in their face?
    >>>>>> It normally starts out by some doper blowing a lie into someones ear. It
    >>>>>> progresses to more harmful dope. Then they have no control over their
    >>>>>> body nor their behavior.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>> That's just plain ignorance. Noone makes it to age 5 these days
    >>>>> without knowing that drugs will kill you (even for the drugs that this
    >>>>> isn't true for).
    >>>> Teenagers and younger are taught the same about alcohol. Look at how
    >>>> many it kills every year. Should not the ones selling or giving it to
    >>>> them be held responsible?
    >>> Absolutely. And they are, whenever they are caught. Stores and
    >>> bars are hit with sting operations constantly to make sure that they
    >>> don't sell to minors.
    >>>
    >>> The very fact that alcohol is treated as such a taboo for the young is
    >>> probably half the reason they binge on it, though. In europe, it is
    >>> not uncommon for kids to have a glass of wine with dinner or at a
    >>> wedding, and they have far fewer problems with teenage alcohol abuse.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>

    >>
    >> I partly agree. But at the same time how many American parents tell
    >> their kids it is wrong to get drunk and what their kids are seeing is
    >> their parents do exactly that. It is the fault of the society you are
    >> brought up in. Yes you should be held responsible for your actions but
    >> that is a separate issue from the legality or illegality of a substance.
    >> After all isn't our court system full of people tying to put the
    >> responsibility for their actions on someone or thing else? So aren't the
    >> kids taught you are not to blame?

    >
    > Some are. Some are not. If you asked my 10 year old who is
    > responsible if he steals from a store, he will not try to shift the
    > blame to another kid, or to ny other part of society. He knows that
    > HE will be responsible if he does something wrong.




    That just goes to back up that this world is not perfect. And yes many
    kids do try to deny responsibility. Some out of fear and guilt, some out
    of being taught by their "society".
    I taught my kids the same values. Sometimes one would try to shift blame
    for one reason or another. They got in much more trouble for lying
    than for the original misdeed.
    There is a huge amount of society that truly believes that there is
    nothing wrong with lying.


    > Your argument does not support your assertion that these things
    > shoulld be illegal. You are using the current nanny state to support
    > the idea of a bigger nanny state. It flies in the face of logic. If
    > you want people to be more responsible, you have to make them
    > responsible.
    >



    There are a lot worse repercussions from the uncontrolled use of drugs
    than theft. Medical, who pays that? Neglect of children, as examples.
    Then you and I have to pay for those expenses one way or another.
    Drug abuse is not a victimless crime.
    No the laws are not set up right but that is no reason that drugs should
    be made totally legal.

  15. Re: Newsgroup Elimination

    John F. Morse wrote:

    > caver1 wrote:
    >
    > >> The very fact that alcohol is treated as such a taboo for the young
    > >> is probably half the reason they binge on it, though. In europe, it
    > >> is not uncommon for kids to have a glass of wine with dinner or at a
    > >> wedding, and they have far fewer problems with teenage alcohol abuse.

    > >
    > > I partly agree. But at the same time how many American parents tell
    > > their kids it is wrong to get drunk and what their kids are seeing is
    > > their parents do exactly that. It is the fault of the society you are
    > > brought up in. Yes you should be held responsible for your actions but
    > > that is a separate issue from the legality or illegality of a substance.
    > > After all isn't our court system full of people tying to put the
    > > responsibility for their actions on someone or thing else? So aren't
    > > the kids taught you are not to blame?

    >
    >
    > I disagree in your first sentence -- only.
    >
    > I don't know where Joe came up with his "half the reason" figure, but
    > that isn't important. Not if it was 90% or 10%. It is not the reason at all.
    >
    > Kids don't care how they obtain the dope of choice (alcohol), nor that
    > it is even a dope. They just want the dope, not any thrill of purchasing it.


    That's a patently false statement, especially where kids are
    concerned. Fact is, most kids start out disliking the drug itself
    but attracted by the "culture". Including the clandestine sort of
    "getting over" that's the heart of wholesale and retail trafficking.

    >
    > All they want to do is be "cool" like their "friends" and not be called
    > a "chicken" or other name.


    And part of that "coolness" is knowing the right people. In fact
    that's the bulk of it. You can be "cool" and not even do drugs, if
    you're part of the "right circles". One of the "coolest" kids I
    knew in school never touched the stuff but always had some for his
    "friends". Those tow facts in conjunction elevated him from run of
    hte mill cool, to super-cool.

    >
    > I'd say that defines peer pressure. Especially after you consider these
    > kids must be around each other all day in school, and cannot escape the
    > pressure.
    >
    > Of course once they start indulging, the get doped (drunk), and lose any
    > proper training they may have had up to that point.
    >
    > From then on it is a downward spiral. They become addicted and will
    > require a stronger and stronger dope to reach the same height of buzz.


    The notion of "gateway drugs" and this "progression" you're talking
    about has long since been proved a myth. Fact is, most addicts
    settle on a drug of choice very early on, and stick with it until
    they quit or die, with so few exceptions it's not even notable.

    > It took a lot of people (peers) to pressure these kids into becoming
    > dopers. It will take a lot of people to help them break the shackles of
    > addiction. Laws are but one way to try and slow down the problem so the
    > recovering people at AA, AV, NA, etc., can assist one-on-one.
    >
    >























  16. Re: Newsgroup Elimination

    Dave U. Random wrote:
    > John F. Morse wrote:
    >
    >> caver1 wrote:
    >>
    >>>> The very fact that alcohol is treated as such a taboo for the young
    >>>> is probably half the reason they binge on it, though. In europe, it
    >>>> is not uncommon for kids to have a glass of wine with dinner or at a
    >>>> wedding, and they have far fewer problems with teenage alcohol abuse.
    >>>>
    >>> I partly agree. But at the same time how many American parents tell
    >>> their kids it is wrong to get drunk and what their kids are seeing is
    >>> their parents do exactly that. It is the fault of the society you are
    >>> brought up in. Yes you should be held responsible for your actions but
    >>> that is a separate issue from the legality or illegality of a substance.
    >>> After all isn't our court system full of people tying to put the
    >>> responsibility for their actions on someone or thing else? So aren't
    >>> the kids taught you are not to blame?
    >>>

    >> I disagree in your first sentence -- only.
    >>
    >> I don't know where Joe came up with his "half the reason" figure, but
    >> that isn't important. Not if it was 90% or 10%. It is not the reason at all.
    >>
    >> Kids don't care how they obtain the dope of choice (alcohol), nor that
    >> it is even a dope. They just want the dope, not any thrill of purchasing it.
    >>

    >
    > That's a patently false statement, especially where kids are
    > concerned. Fact is, most kids start out disliking the drug itself
    > but attracted by the "culture". Including the clandestine sort of
    > "getting over" that's the heart of wholesale and retail trafficking.
    >



    Not at all. Reread the statement and then see why you jumped at the
    incorrect conclusion which had nothing to do with my statement.

    Then support your use of the term "fact" so others won't confuse it with
    an "opinion."


    >> All they want to do is be "cool" like their "friends" and not be called
    >> a "chicken" or other name.
    >>

    >
    > And part of that "coolness" is knowing the right people. In fact
    > that's the bulk of it. You can be "cool" and not even do drugs, if
    > you're part of the "right circles". One of the "coolest" kids I
    > knew in school never touched the stuff but always had some for his
    > "friends". Those tow facts in conjunction elevated him from run of
    > hte mill cool, to super-cool.
    >



    They need to forget trying to be cool. They are never going to fit into
    everyone's mold, so why waste their time?


    >> I'd say that defines peer pressure. Especially after you consider these
    >> kids must be around each other all day in school, and cannot escape the
    >> pressure.
    >>
    >> Of course once they start indulging, the get doped (drunk), and lose any
    >> proper training they may have had up to that point.
    >>
    >> From then on it is a downward spiral. They become addicted and will
    >> require a stronger and stronger dope to reach the same height of buzz.
    >>

    >
    > The notion of "gateway drugs" and this "progression" you're talking
    > about has long since been proved a myth. Fact is, most addicts
    > settle on a drug of choice very early on, and stick with it until
    > they quit or die, with so few exceptions it's not even notable.



    Pure bull, spewed out by dope (not "drug") pushers, and dopers, whose
    brains are fried.

    Again, you use the term "fact" without references.



    --
    John

    No Microsoft, Apple, Intel, Novell, Trend Micro, nor Ford products were used in the preparation or transmission of this message.

    The EULA sounds like it was written by a team of lawyers who want to tell me what I can't do. The GPL sounds like it was written by a human being, who wants me to know what I can do.

  17. Re: Newsgroup Elimination

    > I have sent the following to Verizon. I hope more do the same. They are
    > eliminating access to all but 8 supergroups.
    >
    >
    > Why are you deleting perfectly good newsgroups from your service?


    Because of off-topic spammers like yourself.

    --
    Fight Usenet Spam!!! - http://improve-usenet.org:80/

    Want a great newsgroup reader that will filter out the flood of
    newgroup spam?
    Try MesNews - http://www.mesnews.net/gb/

    If you want your posts to be seen, DON'T USE GOOGLE GROUPS!



  18. Re: Newsgroup Elimination

    Dave U. Random wrote:
    > The notion of "gateway drugs" and this "progression" you're talking
    > about has long since been proved a myth. Fact is, most addicts
    > settle on a drug of choice very early on, and stick with it until
    > they quit or die, with so few exceptions it's not even notable.


    In my research on many subjects, I find one thing consistent
    on all of them: there are liars everywhere. There are several
    things on which I do not know the answer, but I do know how
    to find numerous "studies show", "proved false", etc.
    from BOTH sides.

    --
    Wes Groleau
    "Beware the barrenness of a busy life."
    -- George Verwer

  19. Re: Newsgroup Elimination

    Joe wrote:
    > No, I answered directly. Starting in Kindergarten (age 5) schools are
    > required to preach aout the evils of drug use.


    You said "know" and I understood what you meant.
    But I took advantage of the word to point out that
    knowing and hearing are not the same thing.
    Especially when
    (1) they are hearing messages that contradict each other.
    (2) many of the people presenting these messages also
    make it plain that they (the presenters) can't be trusted.



    --
    Wes Groleau

    Pat's Polemics = http://Ideas.Lang-Learn.us/barrett

  20. Re: Newsgroup Elimination

    On 2008-06-22, caver1 wrote:
    >>>
    >>> Hitler thought the same thing.

    >>
    >> No, it was Darwin...
    >>

    >
    >
    > No it was Hitler. He thought he knew the way to a perfect society and
    > that was through the extermination of all those he thought that society
    > would be better off without them.


    Read more. Darwin said it first.

    Clearly I made a mistake in just killfiling the other thread, your
    cluelessness knows no bounds...


    --
    Joe - Linux User #449481/Ubuntu User #19733
    joe at hits - buffalo dot com
    "Hate is baggage, life is too short to go around pissed off all the
    time..." - Danny, American History X

+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 LastLast