How We Protect At-Risk Kids.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

So what I'm seeing from RWHN is that it has nothing whatsoever to do with "harm", it's entirely about legality.

No, it is about the harm.

Ergo, you are a bad parent. 

I fail to see why this is so hard to grasp.

My kids are at absolutely no risk, ergo, you are incorrect good sir.

So your position is that alcohol isn't harmful?

[Nephew Twiddleton]

So what I'm seeing from RWHN is that it has nothing whatsoever to do with "harm", it's entirely about legality.

No, it is about the harm.

Ergo, you are a bad parent. 

I fail to see why this is so hard to grasp.

My kids are at absolutely no risk, ergo, you are incorrect good sir.

So your position is that alcohol isn't harmful?

His kids would never drink his beer, Roger. It's all those other people's marijuana smoking that puts their kids at risk. Kids know not to drink beer or wine, or fucking 151. That weed though. No, they just can't resist that shit. If parents have weed around, those kids will smoke it down to every last roach.

[Nephew Twiddleton]

No, the answer is actually there.  Pages 49 and 50 might shed some light.

Also, I feel that the irony needs to be pointed out here.

RWHN follows a book written by two drug users, and uses that book to excuse his Aneristic Illusion as to why Prohibition is essential, and why he would be willing to give up something that he enjoys, albeit monthly, if The Man tells him to.

[Pergamos]

Well, he won't state whether or not he feels that alcohol should be banned, only that the lobbyists (rather than history) make that an unlikely scenario.

The word is impossible.  It's a non-starter, not even worth consideration for discussion.

Because acknowledging that would force him to say that either his once a month beer night is illegal or conversely that marijuana should be legalized. His one, maybe two, coffee a day addiction might be lost in some legal limbo there.

That doesn't make any sense.  Alcohol is legal.  If in some magical universe it became illegal again I'd just stop using it, no big deal really. Marijuana should never be legalized.

So if your government decided to criminalize something that you enjoy responsibly you'd just be OK with that?

Wow, you're a real piece of work.

For me personally, alcohol wouldn't be worth a fight.  That doesn't mean I wouldn't fight he criminalization of other things.  Not drinking alcohol on the rare occassions that I do really wouldn't be a big deal.

Like coffee, presumably.

I have known kids who abused caffeine, in a much more abusey way than the coffee addict with bad kidneys who can't sleep right.  They'd chow no doze and get something similar to a speed buzz.  Some of them went overboard and experienced explosive diorhea, vomiting, and hallucinations, all at the same time.    The grounds to prohibit it are certainly more reasonable than marijuana if we are assuming that prohibition reduces use and we want to keep it away from kids.

I'm all in favor of banning the sales of energy drinks and other high-caffeine products to minors.

But if their parents can legally purchase them then they are still easily available.  You haven't really reduced access by much.

Hmm, you seem to be saying that when parents and adults purchase legal substances then it creates easy access for kids.  That is an interesting concept, it's almost like I've heard it before.  I think it was a rather dashing spag from here who might have put forth that concept.... Hmm.....

Gee, am I really trying to use your own arguements against you?  No, I wouldn't possibly get up to such devilish rhetorical tricks, and I am sure you wouldn't get so caught up in someone using one of your arguements that you miss the actual point...well, maybe, depending on if you've had your coffee yet.

[Salty]

Well, he won't state whether or not he feels that alcohol should be banned, only that the lobbyists (rather than history) make that an unlikely scenario.

The word is impossible.  It's a non-starter, not even worth consideration for discussion.

Because acknowledging that would force him to say that either his once a month beer night is illegal or conversely that marijuana should be legalized. His one, maybe two, coffee a day addiction might be lost in some legal limbo there.

That doesn't make any sense.  Alcohol is legal.  If in some magical universe it became illegal again I'd just stop using it, no big deal really. Marijuana should never be legalized.

So if your government decided to criminalize something that you enjoy responsibly you'd just be OK with that?

Wow, you're a real piece of work.

For me personally, alcohol wouldn't be worth a fight.  That doesn't mean I wouldn't fight he criminalization of other things.  Not drinking alcohol on the rare occassions that I do really wouldn't be a big deal.

Like coffee, presumably.

I have known kids who abused caffeine, in a much more abusey way than the coffee addict with bad kidneys who can't sleep right.  They'd chow no doze and get something similar to a speed buzz.  Some of them went overboard and experienced explosive diorhea, vomiting, and hallucinations, all at the same time.    The grounds to prohibit it are certainly more reasonable than marijuana if we are assuming that prohibition reduces use and we want to keep it away from kids.

I'm all in favor of banning the sales of energy drinks and other high-caffeine products to minors.

But if their parents can legally purchase them then they are still easily available.  You haven't really reduced access by much.

Hmm, you seem to be saying that when parents and adults purchase legal substances then it creates easy access for kids.  That is an interesting concept, it's almost like I've heard it before.  I think it was a rather dashing spag from here who might have put forth that concept.... Hmm.....

Gee, am I really trying to use your own arguements against you?  No, I wouldn't possibly get up to such devilish rhetorical tricks, and I am sure you wouldn't get so caught up in someone using one of your arguements that you miss the actual point...well, maybe, depending on if you've had your coffee yet.

[ñͤͣ̄ͦ̌̑͗͊͛͂͗ ̸̨̨̣̺̼̣̜͙͈͕̮̊̈́̈͂͛̽͊ͭ̓͆ͅé ̰̓̓́ͯ́́͞]

See, the deal is, it doesn't matter of thing x is more dangerous, or more addictive, or more whatever than marijuana.  Because that isn't the question.  Whether or not marijuana should be legal should be based on its own merits as a substance, based on its own qualities.  In that respect, for me, it makes absolutely no sense whatsoever to legalize as the impacts of marijuana on youth, on public health, and on society are abundantly clear. 

That isn't the question because you know the answer completely undermines who you are—an unquestioning conformist who has based his moral identity around the Controlled Substances Act (which is fundamentally about comparing how dangerous different substances are).

If you seriously entertained that question you might have to admit that the policies you've helped defend have actually led to more harm to society and you'd have to rethink your entire sense of self, your entire sense of worth. Easier to keep pulling the wool over your own eyes, eh?

If this little prohibition song and dance that you do isn't to convince us, perhaps it's to convince yourself?

[Nephew Twiddleton]

See, the deal is, it doesn't matter of thing x is more dangerous, or more addictive, or more whatever than marijuana.  Because that isn't the question.  Whether or not marijuana should be legal should be based on its own merits as a substance, based on its own qualities.  In that respect, for me, it makes absolutely no sense whatsoever to legalize as the impacts of marijuana on youth, on public health, and on society are abundantly clear. 

That isn't the question because you know the answer completely undermines who you are—an unquestioning conformist who has based his moral identity around the Controlled Substances Act (which is fundamentally about comparing how dangerous different substances are).

If you seriously entertained that question you might have to admit that the policies you've helped defend have actually led to more harm to society and you'd have to rethink your entire sense of self, your entire sense of worth. Easier to keep pulling the wool over your own eyes, eh?

If this little prohibition song and dance that you do isn't to convince us, perhaps it's to convince yourself?

Might have hit upon something there.

[AFK]

So what I'm seeing from RWHN is that it has nothing whatsoever to do with "harm", it's entirely about legality.

No, it is about the harm.

Ergo, you are a bad parent. 

I fail to see why this is so hard to grasp.

My kids are at absolutely no risk, ergo, you are incorrect good sir.

So your position is that alcohol isn't harmful?

Nope.

[AFK]

His kids would never drink his beer, Roger. It's all those other people's marijuana smoking that puts their kids at risk. Kids know not to drink beer or wine, or fucking 151. That weed though. No, they just can't resist that shit. If parents have weed around, those kids will smoke it down to every last roach.

My daughter won't even drink soda, in fact, other than a few sips when she was really young, she's never had soda.  But I also closely monitor what goes on in my home.  I rarely have beer in the house when the kids are home with me, but I also know my daughter, who is only 9, knows better.  She knows alcohol is not for kids and is only an adult thing,  She also knows the harm it causes. 


But the thing is, there are many, many parents who aren't as diligent and on top of things as I am.  It's a pretty commonly accepted fact that kids will experiment with what is most easily obtainable.  It's why Rx abuse is a big issue because they don't need to go to a dealer on the street.  They just need to go into their bathroom, or maybe Mom's purse.  Same with any unsecured alcohol in the home and it certainly would be the same with legal marijuana.  It's already the case with "legal" [size=78%]medical marijuana.  There is no denying this.[/size]

[AFK]

No, the answer is actually there.  Pages 49 and 50 might shed some light.

Also, I feel that the irony needs to be pointed out here.

RWHN follows a book written by two drug users, and uses that book to excuse his Aneristic Illusion as to why Prohibition is essential, and why he would be willing to give up something that he enjoys, albeit monthly, if The Man tells him to.

They wrote about concepts that are true whether or not THEY were the ones to describe them, so their personal back stories are irrelevant to the subject matter they described.

[AFK]

Hmm, you seem to be saying that when parents and adults purchase legal substances then it creates easy access for kids.  That is an interesting concept, it's almost like I've heard it before.  I think it was a rather dashing spag from here who might have put forth that concept.... Hmm.....

Gee, am I really trying to use your own arguements against you? 

Trying was an appropriate word choice because what you described actually backs up what I've been saying all along which is legal drugs in the home create easy access for youth.  So you tried, and of course, failed.

[AFK]

See, the deal is, it doesn't matter of thing x is more dangerous, or more addictive, or more whatever than marijuana.  Because that isn't the question.  Whether or not marijuana should be legal should be based on its own merits as a substance, based on its own qualities.  In that respect, for me, it makes absolutely no sense whatsoever to legalize as the impacts of marijuana on youth, on public health, and on society are abundantly clear. 

That isn't the question because you know the answer completely undermines who you are—an unquestioning conformist who has based his moral identity around the Controlled Substances Act (which is fundamentally about comparing how dangerous different substances are).

No.  That is fundamentally incorrect.  There are protocols for determining what schedule an individual drug will fall under, and it is independent of how other drugs are scheduled.  A drug is scheduled accordingly to how it meets, or doesn't meet the established guidelines, on the individual merits and characteristics of that drug.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

His kids would never drink his beer, Roger. It's all those other people's marijuana smoking that puts their kids at risk. Kids know not to drink beer or wine, or fucking 151. That weed though. No, they just can't resist that shit. If parents have weed around, those kids will smoke it down to every last roach.

My daughter won't even drink soda, in fact, other than a few sips when she was really young, she's never had soda.  But I also closely monitor what goes on in my home.  I rarely have beer in the house when the kids are home with me, but I also know my daughter, who is only 9, knows better.  She knows alcohol is not for kids and is only an adult thing,  She also knows the harm it causes. 


But the thing is, there are many, many parents who aren't as diligent and on top of things as I am.  It's a pretty commonly accepted fact that kids will experiment with what is most easily obtainable.  It's why Rx abuse is a big issue because they don't need to go to a dealer on the street.  They just need to go into their bathroom, or maybe Mom's purse.  Same with any unsecured alcohol in the home and it certainly would be the same with legal marijuana.  It's already the case with "legal" [size=78%]medical marijuana.  There is no denying this.[/size]

Yes, I see.  Special pleading.  YOUR kids won't be affected by the accessabilty of alcohol, it's all those OTHER kids who are affected by accessability of any given substance.  And since not all parents are such paragons of virtue, bad things will happen.

Got it.

You hilarious hypocrite.

[AFK]

His kids would never drink his beer, Roger. It's all those other people's marijuana smoking that puts their kids at risk. Kids know not to drink beer or wine, or fucking 151. That weed though. No, they just can't resist that shit. If parents have weed around, those kids will smoke it down to every last roach.

My daughter won't even drink soda, in fact, other than a few sips when she was really young, she's never had soda.  But I also closely monitor what goes on in my home.  I rarely have beer in the house when the kids are home with me, but I also know my daughter, who is only 9, knows better.  She knows alcohol is not for kids and is only an adult thing,  She also knows the harm it causes. 


But the thing is, there are many, many parents who aren't as diligent and on top of things as I am.  It's a pretty commonly accepted fact that kids will experiment with what is most easily obtainable.  It's why Rx abuse is a big issue because they don't need to go to a dealer on the street.  They just need to go into their bathroom, or maybe Mom's purse.  Same with any unsecured alcohol in the home and it certainly would be the same with legal marijuana.  It's already the case with "legal" [size=78%]medical marijuana.  There is no denying this.[/size]

Yes, I see.  Special pleading.  YOUR kids won't be affected by the accessabilty of alcohol, it's all those OTHER kids who are affected by accessability of any given substance.  And since not all parents are such paragons of virtue, bad things will happen.

Got it.

You hilarious hypocrite.

Bad things DO happen.  According to the CDC, the number one source of accidental poisonings of kids is prescription drugs, more than any other household poison or product.  Over 64% of teens who abuse prescription painkillers get them from someone they know, including parents and other adults, often by taking them without permission.  There is no legitimate reason to believe that legal marijuana could somehow be immune to this.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

Bad things DO happen. 

But not to your or your kids, because you're special, you're "on top of things" and the Smartest Guy in the Room.

So none of this applies to you.  You making alcohol accessible to your kids is okay, because you're "vigilant" and "on top of things", unlike all those stupid people.