DISCORDIANISM: NO SUCH THING

[AFK]

Yes. 

And, I know where you are going next with this, so can we just skip to the part where we agree to disagree on the physical vs psychological dependency debate. 

Ok, that's fine. Let's agree to disagree.

What about food, many children have had their lives ruined because they were psychologically addicted to food, ruining their social life, their physical well being and their waistband in their sweatpants. People addicted to food can die from it! Should we pass laws to govern it?

Maybe we should outlaw World of Warcraft and Second Life as well... lots of people seem psychologically addicted to those, also harming their health and social life.

Absurd, perhaps, but the whole argument that we should outlaw things because some people can't act responsibly seems absurd to me.


(Also, I would echo Jenne's comments, as I have in the past about you and your job )

Not absurd, arbitrary.  I am a monkey afterall.  

[AFK]

I think RWHN's job precludes him from being of the mindset of "drugs are ok for minors, mmkay"...he works in what I call the "trenches" of the War on Drugs, and even though that's not his own schtick, the people he works for are interested in seeing drugs off the streets and out of the hands of  minors.  And possibly all illicit drugs out of the country altogether.

RWHN, I think Maine is lucky state with its justice system--if they truly look at drug abuse as a disease and not a criminal behavior, then your state should be used as a model to ease the turning of the tide that is now in trasition vis a vis legalizing pot use.  I know states like Arizona and Texas are far from that change, but I think the work you do is important in getting states like that to "see reason" about decriminalization of the user (if not the substance).

I think we are a pretty good model for that.  (we certainly aren't a good model for tax burdens, but that's another story)  And I'm really, really hoping the Attorney General who's been leading the charge runs for Gov. when Smeagol, I mean, Baldacci finishes his term.  I'd be lying if I said there weren't some in the State who are hellbent on the punishment angle of law enforcement.  The rest of us kind of tune out and roll our eyes when they start ranting and raving.  But, I think those of us who take a more rational approach have the right connections with the right people and organizations to move forward.  It's just a matter of the money being there to help us continue.  

GRANTS!  GRANTS!    /beating almost-dead-horse...

Actually, we just procured a little bit of funding for me to do some evaluation work for some programs being run in the big city.  It's chump change, but if we find some more chump change I'll still have a job. 

[AFK]

It takes a very selfless person to work with troubled kids...and the lives RWHN touches are really going to be helped in immeasurable ways.  RWHN is heroic--he's not out there winning one for the bank balance, he's out there making people feel better and make better choices about themselves.   He puts his motherfucking money where his mouth his.

Dunno--I've always looked up to people like that.

Okay, okay, not that I don't appreciate the kind words, I really do.  I'm not sure that I'm "heroic" though.  I'm just doing what I do and hope it does something.   

[AFK]

btw, apologies to Vex for my part in taking this thread to jack-land.  Perhaps the drug debate should be excised and placed elsewhere. 

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

Yes. 

And, I know where you are going next with this, so can we just skip to the part where we agree to disagree on the physical vs psychological dependency debate. 

Ok, that's fine. Let's agree to disagree.

What about food, many children have had their lives ruined because they were psychologically addicted to food, ruining their social life, their physical well being and their waistband in their sweatpants. People addicted to food can die from it! Should we pass laws to govern it?

Maybe we should outlaw World of Warcraft and Second Life as well... lots of people seem psychologically addicted to those, also harming their health and social life.

Absurd, perhaps, but the whole argument that we should outlaw things because some people can't act responsibly seems absurd to me.


(Also, I would echo Jenne's comments, as I have in the past about you and your job )

Not absurd, arbitrary.  I am a monkey afterall.  

Well, this went from an interesting discussion to something closer to jumping on RWHN's choice of careers... which I really have no desire to do, so I'm backing out of this particular line of discussion.

[Jenne]

It takes a very selfless person to work with troubled kids...and the lives RWHN touches are really going to be helped in immeasurable ways.  RWHN is heroic--he's not out there winning one for the bank balance, he's out there making people feel better and make better choices about themselves.   He puts his motherfucking money where his mouth his.

Dunno--I've always looked up to people like that.

Okay, okay, not that I don't appreciate the kind words, I really do.  I'm not sure that I'm "heroic" though.  I'm just doing what I do and hope it does something.   

K. 

[Jenne]

btw, apologies to Vex for my part in taking this thread to jack-land.  Perhaps the drug debate should be excised and placed elsewhere. 

Mine, too.  I are an instigator.

[Cramulus]

[Honey]

Sorry to be    but these statistics are flooring me!  Land o' the Free?  Home o' the friggin' brave? 

http://usgovinfo.about.com/lr/us_prison_population/30329/1/

1 Out Of 32 Americans Under Correctional Supervision
6.7 Million in prison, on parole or probation
By Robert Longley, About.com

"While 1 out of every 142 Americans is now actually in prison, 1 out of every 32 of us is either in prison or on parole from prison, according to yet another report on Americans behaving badly from the Bureau of Justice Statistics.

This means that 6.7 million adult men and women -- about 3.1 percent of the total U.S. adult population -- are now very non-voluntary members of America's "correctional community."

[AFK]

Actually, they volunteered when they broke the law. 

[tyrannosaurus vex]

I think it's an indicator that there are too many laws. Most people I know are guilty of breaking a few laws, and usually it's because a lot of laws are stupid. There's also the matter of unjust laws, which the people have no moral imperative to obey in the first place. Laws prohibiting activities that are either not especially dangerous or not especially costly to society have no useful purpose except to fill prisons, and there is no good reason to obey them.

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

Actually, they volunteered when they broke the law. 

If a man or woman does not agree to live by a set of laws, how is breaking the law, volunteering for 'correctional' help? Seems to me, that its a question of the slave obeying the master, or getting beaten. We could say that the slave volunteered to get beaten when he said "Non Serviam", but it seems misleading to me....

[AFK]

Speed Limit is 55, I drive 80.  It is certain that if I get caught going 25 over the speed limit I'll be pulled over and given a ticket.  Sure, maybe I believe going 80 on that stretch of road is perfectly safe and should be allowed.  But the law is the law.  By speeding I have opened myself up to the consequences of that action.  Of course it is very likely to get through that commute without consequences as there aren't always police officers patrolling.  Nevertheless, I have still opened myself up to that opportunity by willingly engaging in an action that I know has an outcome with a penalty attached.  I have volunteered myself for that possible outcome.  Do I want that outcome?  Of course not.  But if I was going 55 it is certain I would be immune to it. 

Now, of course, there are laws that people disagree with.  That is another matter.  One writes to their representatives to suggest a change in a rule or a law.  Or they engage in other forms of activism and advocacy to effect change upon the laws.  The fact remains, however, until if and when those laws are changed, we are subject to them as citizens of that society.  So there can be an argument as to the rightness and wrongness of laws.  But one cannot argue the existence and penalties thereof.  One then has to question how necessary it is to knowingly violate the exiting laws and determine if the reward for doing so really exceeds the penalty of getting caught. 

Look, I'm not going to sit here and suggest that there aren't people who are incarcerated who should not be.  Obviously the justice system is a human construct and subject to human failures.  However, I'm loathe to look at stats and start breaking out violins for those who've been caught and convicted for violating the law.  It's easy to NOT do something.  I mean, I'm not having to employ THAT much willpower to not go crazy and start clubbing people at random. 

[Cain]

Thats about the most pathetic, strawmanish and spineless argument in favour of "obey the law or get punished" I have seen since I stopped reading the Daily Mail.  Congratulations. 

[AFK]

Charming. 

Care to elaborate?