The War on College Students

POSTED BY: SergeantX
UPDATED: Sunday, June 28, 2026 20:30
VIEWED: 8520
PAGE 9 of 12

PREV PAGE 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 NEXT PAGE

SERGEANTX

Friday, May 9, 2008 7:52 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Geezer:
After reading how these guys were operating, I'd suggest "Protecting us from stupid drug dealers" would be a more accurate discription.

I'll grant you that one. Kinda disproves the bit about pot makin' you paranoid. These guys certainly weren't looking over their shoulders.

SergeantX

"Dream a little dream or you can live a little dream. I'd rather live it, cause dreamers always chase but never get it." Aesop Rock

SERGEANTX

Friday, May 9, 2008 8:05 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
Quote:
Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
Just exactly how would legalisation make the 'crime' worse when it would no longer be a crime ?
That’s how, right there. Something is legalized and suddenly it’s okay. This is the problem I have with the whole legalization argument.

Finn, I really shouldn't bother with your idiocy, but hey, I'm bored.

You don't seem to have the ability to make the distinction between good/bad and legal/illegal. Sometimes those overlap. Sometimes they don't. Some things that are legal are still bad, and some things that are illegal aren't necessarily 'bad'. That inconvenient nature of society doesn't fit your simplistic, black and white view of the world but that's your problem. Merely insisting that everyone else signs up with your stilted view isn't a compelling argument.

There are lots of things that are legal that I wouldn't do, and wouldn't want to see people do. But they're legal because you really can't control people the way you would like to. Trying to do that often does more harm than good. They're also legal because we, as a nation value freedom. Part of that is letting people decide for themselves what's good for them and what isn't, as long is it doesn't harm others. That's what we're talking about here. I know that won't fit in your head, but at least try to think about it.

Also, it's been said several times here by the legalization advocates, but your reading skills seem wanting, so I'll capitalize it, and, what the hell, underline it. NO ONE IS SAYING IT SHOULD BE LEGAL TO GIVE DRUGS TO KIDS. So, you can put that strawman away, mkay?

SergeantX

"Dream a little dream or you can live a little dream. I'd rather live it, cause dreamers always chase but never get it." Aesop Rock

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Friday, May 9, 2008 8:15 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by SergeantX:
Also, it's been said several times here by the legalization advocates, but your reading skills seem wanting, so I'll capitalize it, and, what the hell, underline it. NO ONE IS SAYING IT SHOULD BE LEGAL TO GIVE DRUGS TO KIDS. So, you can put that strawman away, mkay?

That’s no straw man. You were the one who used as your example drugs on a college campus, mkay.

Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

RUE

Friday, May 9, 2008 8:29 PM

"You were the one who used as your example drugs on a college campus, mkay."

You watch South Park ? (I probably would have spelled it 'm'kay ?' .)

While brain physiology, biochemistry and other studies put the end of teenage brain remodeling at around 21-22 (with females earlier and males later, in general), we are stuck with a society that places the end of childhood at the end of high school for most things. Maybe that needs to be revisited.

***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."

SERGEANTX

Friday, May 9, 2008 8:34 PM

The negative effects of drugs on the user don't enter into it. Recreational drugs have all kinds of bad effects on people of all ages. The issues is establishing an age where people are mature enough to accept responsibility for their own decisions. Eighteen years works ok, though using age as a guage for maturity is rather arbitrary.

SergeantX

"Dream a little dream or you can live a little dream. I'd rather live it, cause dreamers always chase but never get it." Aesop Rock

FREMDFIRMA

Friday, May 9, 2008 9:20 PM

Quote:
NO ONE IS SAYING IT SHOULD BE LEGAL TO GIVE DRUGS TO KIDS.

Just curious, that include Ritalin, Clonidine, Haldol, and Prozac ?

-F

SERGEANTX

Friday, May 9, 2008 9:44 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
Quote:
NO ONE IS SAYING IT SHOULD BE LEGAL TO GIVE DRUGS TO KIDS.

Just curious, that include Ritalin, Clonidine, Haldol, and Prozac ?

-F

While I'm basically OK with they idea of setting up a list of 'recreational' drugs that would be illegal to give to kids, my real prediliction is that it ought to be up to their parents. But to say so would set rue and signy's ears on fire.

I've been thinking, for the past hour or so, about what would be a good way to establish a person's legal 'adulthood'. Age is a pretty week criterium. Our culture really lacks any kind of recognized 'coming of age' ritual and I think it would be valuable, both from the symoblic and legal standpoint.

How about some kind citizenship test? Some kind of comprehensive set of criteria to establish a person's ability to act independently? And I'm decidedly NOT talking about a test to make sure they conform to society's demands - just something that would establish that they have a decent understanding that actions have consequences and that they'll be expected to deal with them.

That idea might sound like it goes against my libertarian grain, but I kind of like the idea, with the stipulation that once a person is so established, we leave them the hell alone and drop all the nanny state bullshit.

SergeantX

"Dream a little dream or you can live a little dream. I'd rather live it, cause dreamers always chase but never get it." Aesop Rock

RUE

Friday, May 9, 2008 10:38 PM

"Our culture really lacks any kind of recognized 'coming of age' ritual and I think it would be valuable, both from the symoblic and legal standpoint."

EEG with power analysis ? (Determining which frequencies and how strong over regions of the brain.) That correlates very will with brain remodeling and the beginnings of adult judgement, appreciation of consequences and ability to project into the future.

There's a reason why teens have more car accidents, drunk driving, major credit card debt, stupid accidents (I just jumped into that pool - it never occurred to me it might be empty), STDs and unintended pregnancies, impulsive suicides, and so on.

***************************************************************
BTW - it's not that 'kids' all of the sudden become 'adults'. If you look at the animal kingdom, many animals have a long practice period on their way to being full-fledged, independent adults. Likewise there should be some graduated scheme on the way to full adulthood. IMHO anyway.

6IXSTRINGJACK

Saturday, May 10, 2008 12:36 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
Something is legalized and suddenly it’s okay. This is the problem I have with the whole legalization argument. Even if it were legal I still would want it to be a crime for it be on college campuses or in the hands of children. I don’t really understand why this is so hard to understand. It really don't seem like I'm asking a lot here.

Buying, selling and smoking cigarettes are still legal in this country, but you ask a majority in here you're going to find that most folk don't think it's okay. Just because something is legalized doesn't mean that overnight you're going to be the only person in the world with sense enough to know that it isn't good for you.

You know I have a ton of problems with the pills that Big Pharma pushes and tells people in TV and magazine ads to suggest to their doctor... ya know... the guy/gal that went to college for 7-10 years and should be the one suggesting what would work to you, but the pills and the practice of getting people to tell their doctor what pills they want are legal. I just have enough sense to stay the hell away from them, and any little rugrats I ever raise aren't going on 'em unless they choose to put themselves on them when they're old enough to make their own decisions and not living in my house anymore. Here's hoping that I raise 'em right and they don't ever want them.

Quote:
I want my girls to be safe, and the first line of defense is to keep that shit away from them.

I'm not going to argue the dangers of pot with you because it's obvious that this is one issue we are WAAAAAY off the map about, so I'll just say that I do understand that this is something that you want to keep away from your children. I also assume that booze, cigarettes and underage sex are things you don't want your children being around either when they get older. But as much as you'd like to monitor them 24/7 and make sure they always make the right decision, kids are going to be kids and you're going to have to just do your damndest to be a part of their lives and teach them your values and opinions of things and make sure they grow up with a healthy level of self-esteem and the willpower to say no to the temptations out there.

The truth is, legal or not, this stuff is very easy to get a hold of. It is easier to get now, in fact, than it was when the "War" on drugs started. Whether your daughters buy it from the 7-11 or the shady guy on that run-down block that would give you nightmares even knowing she was driving down, if your daughters are going to smoke it, your daughters are going to acquire it. We could spend 3 trillion a year to try to eliminate drugs in this country, and watch the national debt really spiral out of control, and that still isn't going to change the fact that if your daughters want to smoke it, they are going to acquire it. This is on you, my man. Do right... teach them and earn their respect by showing them some as well and hopefully you keep them from shutting you and their mom out of their lives by the time they make their way through high school. That's the only way, and the right way, to truly protect your daughters from drug abuse.

Quote:
We agree on that, but teaching my kid to smoke a phattie does not strike me as responsible or sensible conduct.

I may be wrong here, but I don't think Frem was suggesting that it is responsible or sensible conduct. Frem's never struck me as a pot-head or against the war on drugs simply because he believes that everyone should be smoking pot. I think he was just illustrating a point that if your kids are going to be doing something potentially dangerous, it's probably more preferable that they had a safe enviornment to do it in rather than one of those places that would give you nightmares. Personally, I agree with you that kids, at least under the age of 16, should not smoke pot. I don't believe a lot of medical studies the "experts" churn out on a daily basis, but I knew people in highschool that were burnouts by th

FREMDFIRMA

Saturday, May 10, 2008 9:02 AM

Close.

Lemme put it this way -

Look at abstinence only Sex Education, along with the lies and distortions fed to kids right along with it.

Not only does it not work, it breaks trust between their world and ours because WE LIED TO THEM.

Current drug education is based on the exact same model, proven ineffective, proven a failure, and yet somehow it's supposed to magically work this time around ?

Bullshit, and for the record I used their "catalog of horrors" as a goddamn experimentation CHECKLIST in my own time, mainly because I wanted to know, and knew they were once again lying to me.

And I found that drugs just never "did it" for me, I preferred a clear mind, and none of them were entertaining enough to justify the price.

And as mentioned before, had to solo a crash course in actual sex education by obtaining materials illegal for someone my age to possess.

Kids are going to experiment, and the worse you try to pen them in, the more you encourage it due to their nature - and lying to them doesn't help matters a whit, it just insures they'll never place any real trust in you ever again.

Now, say, were I to catch my older niece with a nickle bag, rather than throw a total fit about it, why not put matters right by having a chat about responsible use while they fire it up in the back yard under your supervision instead of a dangerous environment they would then be facing with less than perfect judgement.

Or you could go right on with the utterly failed model we use for sexual matters, rant, rave, scream and demand they never ever do that while throwing dire threats - see how that works for you.

The key is trust and respect, one could ask a friend of mine's son about that kind of thing, who got a lesson about responsible drinking from a yours truly gentling needling him throughout the porcelin worship and skull splitting aftermath of a drinking binge with some of his less respectable friends - his own embarrassment did more to curb that behavior than any threat his parents might have offered, cause it made him look like an idiot in front of someone he respected.

Kids are gonna do kid things, it's simple human nature, and a caring hand gently but firmly guiding them down the path of responsibility is far more effective than threats, lies and other conduct which will, in the end, cost you their respect and ensure things get worse as they do these things out of retaliation or spite.

Good parenting renders the whole issue moot, is what I am saying - absolute prohibition doesn't work on a social scale, as witnessed here, so therefore why in the hell would anyone in their right mind think it would on an individual scale ?

And responding with force, lies and threats does not work on a social scale, ergo, why would THAT serve any use individually either ?

Do you get the concept ?
Or have I come at it so sideways again that no one can make sense of it ?

-F

PREV PAGE 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 NEXT PAGE