lfnetwork.com mark read register faq members calendar

Thread: Calif. bans smoking in cars with kids
Thread Tools Display Modes
Post a new thread. Add a reply to this thread. Indicate all threads in this forum as read. Subscribe to this forum. RSS feed: this forum RSS feed: all forums
Old 10-15-2007, 02:33 PM   #41
MdKnightR
Senior Member
 
MdKnightR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Feeling Hosed By Your Governme
Posts: 1,859
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jae Onasi
Who's going to pay for all the health care of the people who are on disability for smoking-induced emphysema or lung cancer? Who's going to pay for the intensive care unit stays of these people when they end up on respirators when they get pneumonia? Who's going to pay for all the extra police required to deal with whacked out druggies shooting up on Friday night? Who's going to pay for their health care when they finally discover they have AIDS? Who's going to pay for rehab for the addicts?
Uh, isn't that what our government is already doing with our taxes? Legalization wouldn't change things for the worse in those situations.

MdKnightR is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 10-15-2007, 11:56 PM   #42
Jae Onasi
Antiquis temporibus, nati tibi similes in rupibus ventosissimis exponebantur ad necem
 
Jae Onasi's Avatar
 
Status: Super Moderator
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 10,912
Current Game: Guild Wars 2, VtMB, TOR
Alderaan News Holopics contributor Helpful! LucasCast staff Veteran Fan Fic Author 
Quote:
Originally Posted by MdKnightR
Uh, isn't that what our government is already doing with our taxes? Legalization wouldn't change things for the worse in those situations.
Well, they'd have to do a lot more of it if it were all legalized, and I think it'd have a huge negative impact on public health (mainly drugs). Hait Ashbury's a pretty good indicator of what would happen if illegal drugs in particular were legalized.


From MST3K's spoof of "Hercules Unchained"--heard as Roman medic soldiers carry off an unconscious Greek Hercules on a 1950's Army green canvas stretcher: "Hi, we're IX-I-I. Did somebody dial IX-I-I?"

Read The Adventures of Jolee Bindo and see the amazing Peep Surgery
Story WIP: The Dragonfighters
My blog: Confessions of a Geeky Mom--Latest post: Security Alerts!
Love Star Trek AND gaming? Check out Lotus Fleet.

Jae Onasi is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 10-16-2007, 10:38 AM   #43
MdKnightR
Senior Member
 
MdKnightR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Feeling Hosed By Your Governme
Posts: 1,859
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jae Onasi
Well, they'd have to do a lot more of it if it were all legalized, and I think it'd have a huge negative impact on public health (mainly drugs). Hait Ashbury's a pretty good indicator of what would happen if illegal drugs in particular were legalized.
Let me pose a question then. If Marijuana was legalized today, would you run right out to the nearest convenience store to buy a pack of lefty-cigarettes? I'm guessing not.

If people want to smoke it (or use any other drug), it is readily available already. Legalization (I prefer the term "decriminalization") would simply put a stop to the organized crime associated with it. Look at Prohibition. When alcohol was outlawed, organized crime saw an opportunity. The same opportunity that outlawing drugs has afforded the street gangs of today. If aspirin was outlawed tomorrow, there would soon be a black market for it.

Harry Browne (RIP), the Libertarian who ran for President in 2000, said his first act of office if elected would be to pardon all nonviolent (key word there) drug offenders. Can you imagine an end to prison overcrowding? That would do it! Sure, keep the bass turds that commit violent crime locked up, but people being put in jail for possession is a travesty to a free society.

MdKnightR is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 10-16-2007, 11:09 AM   #44
Totenkopf
English spoken in What
 
Totenkopf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: What?
Posts: 4,787
Imperialist Meatbags Guild Member The Walking Carpets Guild Member Forum Veteran 
As regards nonviolent offenders, house arrest and community service seems like a much better idea (keeps the lib judges happy and minimizes the pressure on jail overcrowding). Always thought that minimum sentencing guidelines were a bit draconian and even counterproductive to a degree.


Now, I want you to remember that no bastard ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making the other poor, dumb bastard die for his country.---Patton

There is no room in this country for hyphenated Americanism.---Teddy Roosevelt

I never forget a face, but in your case I'll make an exception.---Groucho

And if you all get killed, I'll piss on your graves.---Shaman Urdnot

How would you like to own a little bit of my foot in your ass.---Red Foreman
Totenkopf is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 10-16-2007, 11:13 AM   #45
John Galt
Junior Member
 
John Galt's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Galt's Gulch
Posts: 474
Quote:
Originally Posted by MdKnightR
Let me pose a question then. If Marijuana was legalized today, would you run right out to the nearest convenience store to buy a pack of lefty-cigarettes? I'm guessing not.

If people want to smoke it (or use any other drug), it is readily available already. Legalization (I prefer the term "decriminalization") would simply put a stop to the organized crime associated with it. Look at Prohibition. When alcohol was outlawed, organized crime saw an opportunity. The same opportunity that outlawing drugs has afforded the street gangs of today. If aspirin was outlawed tomorrow, there would soon be a black market for it.

Harry Browne (RIP), the Libertarian who ran for President in 2000, said his first act of office if elected would be to pardon all nonviolent (key word there) drug offenders. Can you imagine an end to prison overcrowding? That would do it! Sure, keep the bass turds that commit violent crime locked up, but people being put in jail for possession is a travesty to a free society.
I support this message.

I think people ought to have the freedom to run their own lives how they wish. This includes the freedom to ruin their own lives, so long as they don't harm anyone else in the process the government should not intervene. This also increases the importance of personal responsibility in society, so implementing Libertarian ideals might cause a few bumps in the road, simply because of the people who have relied on Uncle Sam to do their moralizing for them would have to come to grips with their newfound freedoms.





Wer mit Ungeheuern kämpft, mag zusehn, dass er nicht dabei zum Ungeheuer wird. Und wenn du lange in einen Abgrund blickst, blickt der Abgrund auch in dich hinein. -Friedrich Nietzsche, Jenseits von Gut und Böse
John Galt is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 10-17-2007, 12:24 AM   #46
lukeiamyourdad
Using Teletraan I
 
lukeiamyourdad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Montréal, Québec, Canada
Posts: 8,274
LFN Staff Member 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Totenkopf
As regards nonviolent offenders, house arrest and community service seems like a much better idea (keeps the lib judges happy and minimizes the pressure on jail overcrowding). Always thought that minimum sentencing guidelines were a bit draconian and even counterproductive to a degree.

I 100% agree with this. Although it has little to do with the subject, I have a friend who committed a crime, was sentenced to house arrest but allowed to pursue his studies nonetheless, going out only for school on a tight schedule.

He's one of the most amazing mathematicians I've ever met. It would have been such a waste if there was minimum sentences for certain offenses. The Conservative party (of Canada) proposed minimum sentences for offenders. Obviously, if my friend had been to prison because of such measures instead of being judged properly, based on his past and wish to redeem himself, he would have continued to be a drain on society after he came out of prison.

Everything must be judged on a case by case basis.


Quote:
Originally Posted by John Galt
I think people ought to have the freedom to run their own lives how they wish. This includes the freedom to ruin their own lives, so long as they don't harm anyone else in the process the government should not intervene.

Most of the time, people do have the freedom to do as they wish with their lives as long as it doesn't harm anyone else.


Quote:
Originally Posted by John Galt
This also increases the importance of personal responsibility in society, so implementing Libertarian ideals might cause a few bumps in the road, simply because of the people who have relied on Uncle Sam to do their moralizing for them would have to come to grips with their newfound freedoms.
Ironic really. In a way, laws represent morality in a society. Technically, Uncle Sam does your moralizing for you. The State puts limits on what you can and what you can't do, even a minimal one, would have certain laws prohibiting certain behaviors. Telling people not to harm each other is a form of moralizing. That's how I take your statement.

In fact, it's quite childish to say that the government is the one telling its people what to think, especially in a democracy. On one side, the people do elect the legislators, so they have a legitimacy to make laws that represent the wishes of those who voted for them. I think it would be more correct if someone said the government tells you what you can and can't do. If anything, you should blame certain radical non-governmental organizations for forcing their ideals upon the populace, but hey, that's democracy.


http://www.marioramos.ca/ -A friend of mine and an aspiring filmmaker.
lukeiamyourdad is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 10-17-2007, 01:23 AM   #47
MdKnightR
Senior Member
 
MdKnightR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Feeling Hosed By Your Governme
Posts: 1,859
Quote:
Originally Posted by lukeiamyourdad

On one side, the people do elect the legislators, so they have a legitimacy to make laws that represent the wishes of those who voted for them.
In a perfect world......




By the way, the USA is a republic, not a democracy.

MdKnightR is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 10-17-2007, 01:32 AM   #48
Rev7
I'm a Mage
 
Rev7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 3,208
Current Game: CoD 5 WaW; Skate 2
Helpful! 
Quote:
Originally Posted by MdKnightR
By the way, the USA is a republic, not a democracy.
Actually the United States of America is both a Republic and Democracy.

Rev7 is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 10-17-2007, 04:50 PM   #49
lukeiamyourdad
Using Teletraan I
 
lukeiamyourdad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Montréal, Québec, Canada
Posts: 8,274
LFN Staff Member 
Quote:
Originally Posted by MdKnightR
In a perfect world......
I think you missed the point. The legislators have legitimacy to act. Of course, who has been elected with 100% of the vote? No one. The fact that you disagree with certain laws does not make the entire system illegitimate. This is the system you chose to live in. Personal responsibility no?

It's a form of dictatorship of the majority. It's not a perfect system, but people are generally happier under working democracies then under working dictatorships.


Quote:
Originally Posted by MdKnightR
By the way, the USA is a republic, not a democracy.

Don't know what a democracy is eh?

Rev7 said it already, America is both. If you're so picky, the word democracy wouldn't even exist. No country would be one. For reasons of logistics. Can you imagine referendums every day? Does a regular citizen, with job, wife, kids and hobbies have the time to get up every day, get properly informed on every subject, foreign or local, that's going to be involved in referendum of the day, read every bill which will be voted and then decide what to vote? 24 hours isn't enough.

America elects its leaders. It's a democracy.


http://www.marioramos.ca/ -A friend of mine and an aspiring filmmaker.
lukeiamyourdad is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 10-17-2007, 09:05 PM   #50
Jae Onasi
Antiquis temporibus, nati tibi similes in rupibus ventosissimis exponebantur ad necem
 
Jae Onasi's Avatar
 
Status: Super Moderator
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 10,912
Current Game: Guild Wars 2, VtMB, TOR
Alderaan News Holopics contributor Helpful! LucasCast staff Veteran Fan Fic Author 
Quote:
Originally Posted by MdKnightR
Let me pose a question then. If Marijuana was legalized today, would you run right out to the nearest convenience store to buy a pack of lefty-cigarettes? I'm guessing not.

If people want to smoke it (or use any other drug), it is readily available already. Legalization (I prefer the term "decriminalization") would simply put a stop to the organized crime associated with it. Look at Prohibition. When alcohol was outlawed, organized crime saw an opportunity. The same opportunity that outlawing drugs has afforded the street gangs of today. If aspirin was outlawed tomorrow, there would soon be a black market for it.
Alcohol does not have the same addictive qualities of heroin and some other illegal substances, nor does it cause extensive health problems like crack or ice do. Why do you think we have to give prescriptions for some medications? Because the risk of serious health problems associated with incorrect medication usage (under- or over-) makes it mandatory that someone who knows what they're doing instructs the patient on the correct way to take it. A reasonable number of my patients are health-savvy and could make their own decisions on these things. A lot of my patients could care less. A lot of my patients are blessed in other areas besides intelligence and would not be able to learn enough to figure out how to take it on their own. A great majority of patients think that if some medicine is good, even more must be better, when in fact 'even more' could become risky or even deadly. A few of my patients, God bless them, are complete and utter morons and would be a danger not only to themselves but to others if they had to try to figure some of this out on their own. A very few would actually use the meds for malicious reasons.

You cannot equate alcohol with any illegal drug with the exception of maybe marijuana. Heroin, cocaine, crack, ice, meth, PCP, etc are so dangerous either physically/lethality or in terms of addiction potential that they should never be legalized. If you need some more convincing, go volunteer in an ER or a police department (preferably a larger city one) on some Friday or Saturday nights, if you haven't already--you'll get to see the destructive effects of these drugs first hand on a regular basis. After you see a few people come through who are in withdrawal because they can't get their fix, or who've destroyed their bodies with meth (if they haven't caused an explosion trying to make it at home), or the kids who've been beaten to a pulp because their parent(s) were strung out, you'll have a different perspective.

I'm all for personal responsibility, but that doesn't mean you should hand someone a gun to shoot themselves with, and legalizing highly addictive and/or dangerous illegal substances would be akin to doing just that.


From MST3K's spoof of "Hercules Unchained"--heard as Roman medic soldiers carry off an unconscious Greek Hercules on a 1950's Army green canvas stretcher: "Hi, we're IX-I-I. Did somebody dial IX-I-I?"

Read The Adventures of Jolee Bindo and see the amazing Peep Surgery
Story WIP: The Dragonfighters
My blog: Confessions of a Geeky Mom--Latest post: Security Alerts!
Love Star Trek AND gaming? Check out Lotus Fleet.

Jae Onasi is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 10-18-2007, 01:06 AM   #51
MdKnightR
Senior Member
 
MdKnightR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Feeling Hosed By Your Governme
Posts: 1,859
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rev7
Actually the United States of America is both a Republic and Democracy.
Just wanted to see who was paying attention.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Jae Onasi
Alcohol does not have the same addictive qualities of heroin and some other illegal substances, nor does it cause extensive health problems like crack or ice do.
I suppose that Cirrhosis of the liver isn't an extensive health problem. Or that people can't die for alcohol poisoning. Or drunken driving is harmless. Seems to me that they are equatable.

Alcohol is very additive to many people, as is nicotine. Some people don't even know that they are predisposed to alcoholism and are addicted from the very first drink. In fact, up to 40 percent of industrial fatalities and 47 percent of industrial injuries can be linked to alcohol use and alcoholism.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jae Onasi
Why do you think we have to give prescriptions for some medications?
Ah, but there's the rub! Prescription medication is LEGAL, but that's not to say that people don't get their hands on it using less than savory methods.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Jae Onasi
You cannot equate alcohol with any illegal drug with the exception of maybe marijuana. Heroin, cocaine, crack, ice, meth, PCP, etc are so dangerous either physically/lethality or in terms of addiction potential that they should never be legalized.
What about the medicinal use of marijuana? Or how about the addictive qualities of the legal drug morphine? Morphine can be just as harmful as heroin.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jae Onasi
If you need some more convincing, go volunteer in an ER or a police department (preferably a larger city one) on some Friday or Saturday nights, if you haven't already--you'll get to see the destructive effects of these drugs first hand on a regular basis. After you see a few people come through who are in withdrawal because they can't get their fix, or who've destroyed their bodies with meth (if they haven't caused an explosion trying to make it at home), or the kids who've been beaten to a pulp because their parent(s) were strung out, you'll have a different perspective.
And this is my point. ALL of this happens in a society that has the mistaken notion that the war on drugs is a productive venture. Ever since today's illicit drugs were outlawed, addiction has risen dramatically. There was virtually no drug problem before these drugs were outlawed. People weren't robbing their grandmothers so they could go buy Coca-Cola by the case! (FYI, cocaine was one of the original ingredients for those of you who didn't know) All the money that has been funneled into this "war" has been spent in vain, and yet people are in an uproar over spending in the Iraq war.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jae Onasi
I'm all for personal responsibility, but that doesn't mean you should hand someone a gun to shoot themselves with, and legalizing highly addictive and/or dangerous illegal substances would be akin to doing just that.
No one said such a thing. I am not advocating addiction. Decriminalization would be a productive move because all the funding that has been poured into combating drug trafficking could then be used for treatment and programs that encourage people to stay off drugs. It is widely known that the best way to combat addiction is through workplace drug screening. The Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration reports that 77% of drug users in the United States are employed. 77%!!! If every place of employment were to participate in a Drug-Free Workplace program, it would make an incredible positive impact that the current approach could never have. Not to mention the impact that would have on the cost of health care and health insurance coverage.

MdKnightR is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Post a new thread. Add a reply to this thread. Indicate all threads in this forum as read. Subscribe to this forum. RSS feed: this forum RSS feed: all forums
Go Back   LucasForums > Network > Knights of the Old Republic > Community > Kavar's Corner > Calif. bans smoking in cars with kids

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:35 AM.

LFNetwork, LLC ©2002-2011 - All rights reserved.
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.