How We Protect At-Risk Kids.

[AFK]

I used to think you were a rational thinker immune to bullshit conspiracy theory talking points.

What makes THIS particularly funny is that I have based my change of thinking on RHWN's posts.

Wait, but remember, I'm just a hapless idiot who can barely manage to tie my shoes.  So you are saying you are easily swayed in your thinking by morons.  You sure you want to go bragging about that?

[The Good Reverend Roger]

The one thing of value that has come from these threads is this:  I used to think that "prevention" was a good use of resources.  Now I understand that it's just another way of keeping CCA's pockets nice and full, because "prevention" is just "prohibition in a funny dress".  It's the Volstead Act rebranded.  Only this, and nothing more.

Yeah, it's just another avenue for getting cops into schools and sending "undesirables" to prison.

Anyone involved in "drug prevention" is a de facto racist, classist piece of shit.

Yep.  And the latter is patently obvious from RHWN's claim that HE isn't putting HIS kids at risk by making alcohol accessible, but OTHER people are.  And I think I can guess who those other people are.


Also, "MARIJUANA POISONING!"

He's a fart-sniffer... he can't look at or consider any information that comes from outside the "preventionist" (read: authoritarian punishment-freak) community.

We've seen that before.  Thinking Garbo, here.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

I used to think you were a rational thinker immune to bullshit conspiracy theory talking points.

What makes THIS particularly funny is that I have based my change of thinking on RHWN's posts.

Wait, but remember, I'm just a hapless idiot who can barely manage to tie my shoes.  So you are saying you are easily swayed in your thinking by morons.  You sure you want to go bragging about that?

Well, if moronic punishment freaks are running prevention, then...YEAH.  It's time to scrap the whole damn thing.

[AFK]

I do kind of hope he sticks around for another five years because the inevitable meltdown when his kids start smoking pot is going to be amazing.

Well, my son is only 3, so that seems pretty far-fetched.

The dead girl in the OP was only 2.

Mmm, Red Herring is delicious.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

I do kind of hope he sticks around for another five years because the inevitable meltdown when his kids start smoking pot is going to be amazing.

Well, my son is only 3, so that seems pretty far-fetched.

The dead girl in the OP was only 2.

Mmm, Red Herring is delicious.

TRANSLATION:  RWHN has no answer.

And he supports a system that results in 2 year olds having their brains bashed out on the floor.

And he does the EXACT SAME THING as the 2 year old's parents were doing.

And he justifies it with THE DAILY MAIL. 

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

The one thing of value that has come from these threads is this:  I used to think that "prevention" was a good use of resources.  Now I understand that it's just another way of keeping CCA's pockets nice and full, because "prevention" is just "prohibition in a funny dress".  It's the Volstead Act rebranded.  Only this, and nothing more.

Yeah, it's just another avenue for getting cops into schools and sending "undesirables" to prison.

Anyone involved in "drug prevention" is a de facto racist, classist piece of shit.

Yep.  And the latter is patently obvious from RHWN's claim that HE isn't putting HIS kids at risk by making alcohol accessible, but OTHER people are.  And I think I can guess who those other people are.


Also, "MARIJUANA POISONING!"

He has made it abundantly clear who "those people" are. They're poor people and single mothers, who "don't care" enough about their children to appropriately monitor them because they're too busy being lazy ne-er-do-wells misprioritizing things like paying rent and buying food. It is perfectly obvious that those kids need to be punished, for their own good, amirite? 

Plus AMERICA, FUCK YEAH because the prison industrial complex won't be profitable without the tireless work of Preventionists™ like RWHN, doing his part to make sure owning or using marijuana plants remains a crime.

4 THA CHILLUNS.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

He has made it abundantly clear who "those people" are. They're poor people and single mothers, who "don't care" enough about their children to appropriately monitor them because they're too busy being lazy ne-er-do-wells misprioritizing things like paying rent and buying food. It is perfectly obvious that those kids need to be punished, for their own good, amirite? 

Plus AMERICA, FUCK YEAH because the prison industrial complex won't be profitable without the tireless work of Preventionists™ like RWHN, doing his part to make sure owning or using marijuana plants remains a crime.

4 THA CHILLUNS.

Precisely.  And what's a few dead children, when you're protecting the children?   

[AFK]

The one thing of value that has come from these threads is this:  I used to think that "prevention" was a good use of resources.  Now I understand that it's just another way of keeping CCA's pockets nice and full, because "prevention" is just "prohibition in a funny dress".  It's the Volstead Act rebranded.  Only this, and nothing more.

Yeah, it's just another avenue for getting cops into schools and sending "undesirables" to prison.

Anyone involved in "drug prevention" is a de facto racist, classist piece of shit.

Yep.  And the latter is patently obvious from RHWN's claim that HE isn't putting HIS kids at risk by making alcohol accessible, but OTHER people are.  And I think I can guess who those other people are.

I'm not, it isn't accessible in my home.

Now you ARE lying.  You said, just a week ago or so, that you were having a beer at your house while your children were sleeping.

Yes, so unless they started sleepwalking, the alcohol I was consuming was quite inaccessible to them. 

[AFK]

I do kind of hope he sticks around for another five years because the inevitable meltdown when his kids start smoking pot is going to be amazing.

Well, my son is only 3, so that seems pretty far-fetched.

The dead girl in the OP was only 2.

Mmm, Red Herring is delicious.

TRANSLATION:  RWHN has no answer.

There was no question.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

I do kind of hope he sticks around for another five years because the inevitable meltdown when his kids start smoking pot is going to be amazing.

Well, my son is only 3, so that seems pretty far-fetched.

The dead girl in the OP was only 2.

And apparently his daughter doesn't count, because, well, in RWHN's world females don't HAVE agency.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

The one thing of value that has come from these threads is this:  I used to think that "prevention" was a good use of resources.  Now I understand that it's just another way of keeping CCA's pockets nice and full, because "prevention" is just "prohibition in a funny dress".  It's the Volstead Act rebranded.  Only this, and nothing more.

Yeah, it's just another avenue for getting cops into schools and sending "undesirables" to prison.

Anyone involved in "drug prevention" is a de facto racist, classist piece of shit.

Yep.  And the latter is patently obvious from RHWN's claim that HE isn't putting HIS kids at risk by making alcohol accessible, but OTHER people are.  And I think I can guess who those other people are.

I'm not, it isn't accessible in my home.

Now you ARE lying.  You said, just a week ago or so, that you were having a beer at your house while your children were sleeping.

Yes, so unless they started sleepwalking, the alcohol I was consuming was quite inaccessible to them.

The girl in the article was sleeping when the couple in question were smoking.

BUT THAT'S DIFFERENT.

And having weed in the house AT ALL is "accessible", but you having your beer is not.

You are a bad father.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

I do kind of hope he sticks around for another five years because the inevitable meltdown when his kids start smoking pot is going to be amazing.

Well, my son is only 3, so that seems pretty far-fetched.

The dead girl in the OP was only 2.

And apparently his daughter doesn't count, because, well, in RWHN's world females don't HAVE agency.

Good point.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

So, I can't help thinking that since RWHN single-handedly, as he likes to tell us, gave pivotal testimony and engineered the campaign to keep marijuana from being legalized in Maine, from here on out every time a child is removed from parental custody on the basis of their marijuana use is a direct consequence of his actions. Every time each of those children is raped, molested, neglected, or killed in their foster home, the moral responsibility lies directly on his shoulders.

Bet he gets off on it.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

So, I can't help thinking that since RWHN single-handedly, as he likes to tell us, gave pivotal testimony and engineered the campaign to keep marijuana from being legalized in Maine, from here on out every time a child is removed from parental custody on the basis of their marijuana use is a direct consequence of his actions. Every time each of those children is raped, molested, neglected, or killed in their foster home, the moral responsibility lies directly on his shoulders.

Bet he gets off on it.

Those lazy poor people have to LEARN.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

The one thing of value that has come from these threads is this:  I used to think that "prevention" was a good use of resources.  Now I understand that it's just another way of keeping CCA's pockets nice and full, because "prevention" is just "prohibition in a funny dress".  It's the Volstead Act rebranded.  Only this, and nothing more.

Yeah, it's just another avenue for getting cops into schools and sending "undesirables" to prison.

Anyone involved in "drug prevention" is a de facto racist, classist piece of shit.

Yep.  And the latter is patently obvious from RHWN's claim that HE isn't putting HIS kids at risk by making alcohol accessible, but OTHER people are.  And I think I can guess who those other people are.

I'm not, it isn't accessible in my home.

Now you ARE lying.  You said, just a week ago or so, that you were having a beer at your house while your children were sleeping.

Yes, so unless they started sleepwalking, the alcohol I was consuming was quite inaccessible to them.

The girl in the article was sleeping when the couple in question were smoking.

BUT THAT'S DIFFERENT.

And having weed in the house AT ALL is "accessible", but you having your beer is not.

You are a bad father.

But the DIFFERENCE IS

THE DIFFERENCE

Is that alcohol is LEGAL.