Fascinating guys.
fair enoughMacbeth wrote:
I never said that.Let me guess, it is the TV's fault when people that sell drugs in front of their kids, have those same kids in trouble for drug dealing or using.
It's just that, pot is basically a ground up plant. And a child occasionally seeing their mother giving people small amounts of a plants in exchange for money is no more distressing to the human psyche as a child seeing their mother exchange homemade pottery for money. Now, violent television has a debatable effect on human child development and that is a subject that is no longer debated anymore. Violent televsion won the domestic policy debate.
I was just pointing out the rather arbitrary distinction? (I can't think of a better word than distinction right now)In fairness, you're the guy who thinks athletes are role models. Your view of athletics contradicts the above statement you made.Must be great to always be able to blame anything or anyone for your actions and your decisions.
I never said athletes are roll models to me, I said athletes are roll models to other people, and that is not a false statement. There is no contradiction
The idea that some people hold athletes as role models as well your view that athletes should be held to a higher standard goes down a line of logic that removes a certain amount of responsibility from average people and unfairly redistributes it to athletes.
These two seemingly distinct views actually contradict each other once you actually go and think them out.
These two seemingly distinct views actually contradict each other once you actually go and think them out.
Macbeth, really, stop putting words in my mouth. I did not say athletes SHOULD be used as roll models OR should be held to a higher standard either. I said, like it or not they ARE roll models to a lot of people. There is a price for everyone's fame and being held to a higher standard, as something others might want to strive to achieve is part of that price. It is part of their paycheck for endorsements. I didn't invent that hero worship or agree with it, but it does exist regardless.Macbeth wrote:
The idea that some people hold athletes as role models as well your view that athletes should be held to a higher standard goes down a line of logic that removes a certain amount of responsibility from average people and unfairly redistributes it to athletes.
These two seemingly distinct views actually contradict each other once you actually go and think them out.
Roll models for me as a kid were always pilots. NOT any specific pilot, just the profession.
People should try not breaking the law, instead of breaking the law and then wailing about the law being 'unfair'.
Fuck Israel
Dilbert, ya nailed it.Dilbert_X wrote:
People should try not breaking the law, instead of breaking the law and then wailing about the law being 'unfair'.
*role models ffs
Stories like this make me sad and angry. If the police had not stepped in, the woman would've sold the weed to another guy, who would have taken it home, smoked up with someone else most likely and then ordered a pizza a couple hours later. Instead, tens of thousands of dollars of tax payers money are wasted creating a broken home for four children whilst some over paid judge can feel "morally" correct for locking up a woman for 12 years for selling the cuttings from a plant. Great work.
Stories like this make me sad and angry. If the police had not stepped in, the woman would've sold the weed to another guy, who would have taken it home, smoked up with someone else most likely and then ordered a pizza a couple hours later. Instead, tens of thousands of dollars of tax payers money are wasted creating a broken home for four children whilst some over paid judge can feel "morally" correct for locking up a woman for 12 years for selling the cuttings from a plant. Great work.
I'm pretty awesome, I have to admit.
Fuck Israel
That's just dumb.Dilbert_X wrote:
People should try not breaking the law, instead of breaking the law and then wailing about the law being 'unfair'.
Just because it's "the law" does not mean I have to agree with it.
No-one said you had to agree with it, just don't break it.
If you disagree either move or work to get it changed.
If you disagree either move or work to get it changed.
Fuck Israel
correct you do not have to agree with. In such a case you rally to try to change it, not disregard it.Jaekus wrote:
That's just dumb.Dilbert_X wrote:
People should try not breaking the law, instead of breaking the law and then wailing about the law being 'unfair'.
Just because it's "the law" does not mean I have to agree with it.
Is there an echo in here?
The law in this case is wrong. It will not be changed until cases like this occur and attention is brought to them which only then gives leverage for action to have it changed.
The law in this case is wrong. It will not be changed until cases like this occur and attention is brought to them which only then gives leverage for action to have it changed.
The law is fine, she got a harsh sentence - most probably it will be appealed and reduced.
In most states don't people only serve one year for every ten of their sentence?
In most states don't people only serve one year for every ten of their sentence?
Last edited by Dilbert_X (2011-05-20 03:22:52)
Fuck Israel
Why do I think there is a problem with selling drugs and involving your children in it? I dunno, crazy I guess.Jaekus wrote:
Is there an echo in here?
The law in this case is wrong. It will not be changed until cases like this occur and attention is brought to them which only then gives leverage for action to have it changed.
She didn't involve her children. Did they sell the drugs? No.
well they pleaded guilty to something. Might wanna go back and re-read it.Jaekus wrote:
She didn't involve her children. Did they sell the drugs? No.
T total then lowing?lowing wrote:
you would rather work to have them changed rather than just not do drugs? Knock yourself out. I got more pressing things to do with my life than WORK to make life easier for drug dealers and drug addicts, like.....watch tv.Hurricane2k9 wrote:
IMO I'd rather work to have them changed instead of simply being complacent.SEREMAKER wrote:
theres unjust laws everywhere ..... hell in NC you can legally slap your wife on the county court steps
nothing to be pissy about, just don't break then theres nothing to worry about
Someone please take a screenshotlowing wrote:
Dilbert, ya nailed it.Dilbert_X wrote:
People should try not breaking the law, instead of breaking the law and then wailing about the law being 'unfair'.
sorry, you lost me here.Vilham wrote:
T total then lowing?lowing wrote:
you would rather work to have them changed rather than just not do drugs? Knock yourself out. I got more pressing things to do with my life than WORK to make life easier for drug dealers and drug addicts, like.....watch tv.Hurricane2k9 wrote:
IMO I'd rather work to have them changed instead of simply being complacent.
Just because they're in their presence does not mean the kids knew about it. Another reason the law is wrong.lowing wrote:
well they pleaded guilty to something. Might wanna go back and re-read it.Jaekus wrote:
She didn't involve her children. Did they sell the drugs? No.
ok you did read where they pleaded guilty to selling and possession? right?Jaekus wrote:
Just because they're in their presence does not mean the kids knew about it. Another reason the law is wrong.lowing wrote:
well they pleaded guilty to something. Might wanna go back and re-read it.Jaekus wrote:
She didn't involve her children. Did they sell the drugs? No.
Last edited by lowing (2011-05-20 03:55:16)
I can't read that, can you use better grammar please?
he means teetotal
Teetotalism (also tee-totalism) refers to either the practice of or the promotion of complete abstinence from alcoholic beverages. A person who practises (and possibly advocates) teetotalism is called a teetotaler (also spelled teetotaller; plural teetotalers or teetotallers) or is simply said to be teetotal. The teetotalism movement was first started in Preston, England in the early 19th century.[1]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teetotalism
Teetotalism (also tee-totalism) refers to either the practice of or the promotion of complete abstinence from alcoholic beverages. A person who practises (and possibly advocates) teetotalism is called a teetotaler (also spelled teetotaller; plural teetotalers or teetotallers) or is simply said to be teetotal. The teetotalism movement was first started in Preston, England in the early 19th century.[1]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teetotalism
Blackbelts are just whitebelts who have never quit.
sorry fixedJaekus wrote:
I can't read that, can you use better grammar please?
thank you method.m3thod wrote:
he means teetotal
Teetotalism (also tee-totalism) refers to either the practice of or the promotion of complete abstinence from alcoholic beverages. A person who practises (and possibly advocates) teetotalism is called a teetotaler (also spelled teetotaller; plural teetotalers or teetotallers) or is simply said to be teetotal. The teetotalism movement was first started in Preston, England in the early 19th century.[1]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teetotalism