Ban-Crazy

[droseraguy]

Come on everyone, lets just get along ! Quit all this thinking and debating and bickering, it's bad for our childrens development. We need to let our elected officials, whom we elected by the way, decide what is best for everyone. Just fall in line and accept what is going to be the ultimate outcome anyway. Individuality only causes CONFUSION and DIVISION.

UP with the underwear conformity, Down with individualism !

 

[throckmoron]

This has been an interesting thread to follow (I just read it all). I love to see people scrutinizing our government (just wish you heard it more often from more people). It is a very unusual thing for me to say, but I guess the "ban" on certain light bulbs doesn't bother me at all. It was said earlier but not fully driven home that: rather than looking at something like this as a ban on your personal freedom to choose a bulb, look at it as setting higher standards of efficiency for the manufacturing sector. One of the big reasons we are in this environmental crisis is due to extremely low standards on energy efficiency in all its many forms, no matter how big or small. I would guess without reading the proposed bill that it disallows the sale of bulbs not meeting certain efficiency criteria. This is fine and in my opinion necessary. I think that large corporations (or small ones) who knowingly produce products that use a lot more energy to do something than other similar products should be regulated. Putting market pressure on light bulb manufacturers state by state would gradually give large companies a choice to either switch over to more responsible designs or slowly go out of business.
As far as the weight standards for modelling, this just gets into a big problem in our population of not being in control of yourself-- it's not a problem that can be fixed by legislations. I guess I would sooner place a ban on overeating than undereating if I were feeling ban happy on food issues. Why is it considered an acceptable weakness to compulsively overeat? Quit stuffing your fat mouth! Quit it! I don't care if it sounds insensitive. I say the same type of thing to friends who smoke, drink too much, do too many drugs, drive recklessly. I try to personally hold people who are within my sphere accountable for themselves and their actions. I think there is not enough of this accountability pressed in social spheres or else there would not be a lot of these major issues up for legislative control.

 

[quogue]

I propose complete anarchy, no rule of law what so ever. No police, no military, no gov't, every human for themselves.

Agreed, kinda like what Crass was talkin bout all those years ago... anarchy and peace. People living responsibly with complete freedom and respecting others and cooperating with one another. Will take awhile for society to be able to handle itself, but I think some day it will.

Or do you really mean every man for himself and fires and riots and alla that?

 

[quogue]

Also, I think the person with this idea is trying to deal with the world as he or she thinks it should be, rather than how it is.

Yeah, there's alotta those types in NYC & L.I. politics.... cause they know better than we do, they should "guide" us for we would be lost without them.
Cuomo said something to that effect when he was governer of NY.
Those are the condescending politicians I like the least, maybe even worse than the corrupt ones..

 

[Finch]

Yeah, there's alotta those types in NYC & L.I. politics.... cause they know better than we do, they should "guide" us for we would be lost without them.
Cuomo said something to that effect when he was governer of NY.
Those are the condescending politicians I like the least, maybe even worse than the corrupt ones..

Its not just them, the midwest and texas and such also have passed some astonishingly restricting laws as well

 

[Bugweed]

Well, so much for the freedom I enjoyed growing up with. Hope the rest of you can deal with it. My father is depressed. He cannot believe he fought for freedom and liberty in World War 2 only to have it come down to a police state, and using psychological tricks to enslave a nation. Oh, well! Like Father, like Son!

 

[vft guy in SJ]

You know.. The problem is that people abuse their freedoms. There wouldnt be a need to have all these laws if people could govern themselves. Its not like politicians just sit in their offices dreaming up ways to take away our liberties. Enough people out there have abused things enough that it has become necessary to find a way to curb those behaviors. Since the people can not do it for themselves the government has to step in and do it for them. I blame poor upbringing for the way things are now..

 

[trashcan]

My personal opinion is that the government should only "encourage" people to be more responsible, and not punish them for being irresponsible. For example, perhaps if you're pulled over not wearing a seatbelt, you get a citation that only goes to your insurance company. You aren't fined, but you may not be eligible for certain insurance discounts. Or if you use the kind of lights that California wants you to use, you're eligible for a tax break.

This is a tough issue for me personally, because I see people on other forums all the time about how "stupid" it is to wear a helmet while riding a motorcycle. I guess it is their decision to make, but it saddens me that there are so many people who actually want to do this. I'm also conflicted on whether I'd support a graduated licensing system as well, but at the moment I'm in favor of it.

 

[vft guy in SJ]

This is a tough issue for me personally, because I see people on other forums all the time about how "stupid" it is to wear a helmet while riding a motorcycle. I guess it is their decision to make, but it saddens me that there are so many people who actually want to do this. I'm also conflicted on whether I'd support a graduated licensing system as well, but at the moment I'm in favor of it.

As an avid rider I say those people are fools. I have been riding for over 15 years and I have been down twice.. BOTH times my helmet saved my life. Law or not, helmets save lives and refusing to wear one just shows that you have nothing to protect in the first place.

Edit: One other thing for all the Californians out there... As of Jan. 1 2007 Any passenger in your car with no seatbelt, BOTH the passanger and the driver get a ticket. This is changed from only the passenger getting the ticket.

 

[JB_OrchidGuy]

VFT guy. You are correct that there are people who find ways to abuse things, but the fact of the matter is that they let a few bad apples ruin it for all. Also more than likely there is already a law in place that deals with some of these issues they make new laws for. Then when they make the new law it doesn't get enforced. Take the gun law( I forget the name) for instance. It escapes me exactly what the law was, but it was only applied in two cases the year after it was enacted. They have made soooo many laws that are not enforced it is pathetic, and if you continue making laws and making laws then eventually everything will be manned or restricted. I still agree with Bugweed. Many god folks lost their lives fighting for our freedoms and now we are going the road of Nazi Germany.

As far as my seatbelt is concerned. I will wear it when I feel the need to. I am not in a super speedway racing at 200 MPH. Seat belts have been shown to kill as well so if the wreck is bad enough either way your going to die. I have been in 4 wrecks 3 of them my fault, and never had a seatbelt on in any of them. Of course the wrecks were not bad, but I still totaled 2 cars.

If the government wants to tax the more inefficient light bulbs then that is one thing. That is a way to make more revenue and give people a tax break to buy the CF bulbs, but a ban is just stupid. Remember the old saying. "Give them an inch and they take a mile" That is what the government does and will continue to do. Of course people do the same thing.

I am not for total Anarchy. Some rules are needed, but not the big brother government we are getting slowly but surely.

Helments I agree with because your not protected by the frame of the car, and if you want to kill yourself then thats on you. I would gladdly wear a brain bucket while riding. Hopefully I will be getting a bike soon!!!!!!

 

[quogue]

People abusing things, so ban them? I saw an earlier post in this thread talking about welfare recipients and their abuses, maybe we should ban welfare?
Take it from me, I had a welfare momma with 9 kids from different fathers living above me in one of my apts in Brooklyn, she was no victim.
The more kids, the more $$ from the services. Sad that she abused this and I could go into detail how lousy it was living under them or how filthy they lived but all I'm going to say is if anything, welfare abuse needs to be adressed and banning it would not be the answer.
You can't let a couple of people who abuse something ruin it for the rest of the honest people out there.
Bans are just "feel-good legislation"

 

[vft guy in SJ]

Welfare has already been severely curtailed to eliminate exactly the kind of abuse you are talking about. Unfortunately there is no simple solution to the welfare issue. Banning it completely is not possible, but the laws are constantly being updated to weed out the career welfare people.

You can't let a couple of people who abuse something ruin it for the rest of the honest people out there.
Bans are just "feel-good legislation"

You are wrong with that. If you think back, probably your entire life you have been a victim of this in one way or another.. ever had recess taken away for a whole classroom because a couple kids acted up? Ever been punished along with your siblings because your parents just dont want to deal with any of you for a while? If you are in the military, and someone screws up in boot camp, its likely the whole group gets punished. You are going to see examples of the majority being effected by the few everywhere you look. Same same here.. if enough people abuse a freedom then its likely that everyone will lose that freedom.

 

[quogue]

I'm not wrong, that mentality is wrong. Yeah it happens.... but I think it shouldn't

Oh and for the record, I wasn't trying to say "ban welfare" I was just making an example of it. Just to clear up any confusion of anyone reading these posts.

 

[trashcan]

As an avid rider I say those people are fools. I have been riding for over 15 years and I have been down twice.. BOTH times my helmet saved my life. Law or not, helmets save lives and refusing to wear one just shows that you have nothing to protect in the first place.

I agree, although in the end I suppose this is my "opinion" and it shouldn't be forced on anyone else. Although I'd imagine it's a little less debated than something like a seatbelt, it's easy to take too far. I'm sure for every person that argues that it's unsafe to ride without a helmet, there is someone else that argues it's simply unsafe to ride (period). Everyone manages their own level of risk, and if it's not harming anyone, then they should be able to do as they wish.

 

[nepenthes gracilis]

Im making my own country, lets become THEM The Highly Evolved Mammals (formerly of the US).

Lets face it, we are going to deplete all out energy and the world will go into crisis and we'll all die. Who cares! Lets live life now, screw it!

 

[ktulu]

First my comment about total anarchy was to present an extreme. I dont think human beings will ever reach a point where they respect each other, so we either need to deal with a complete lack of control and total anarchy. Truely every human for themselves. The other option is soceity. As long as you have society certain liberties will be lost due to regulation. Its the price of living in a group. Either social pressure or gov't laws will force you to do something. The whole idea behind punishing a whole group such as a class or unit for the misbehavior of a few is to create a mini soceity in effect that will regulate itself so the authority doesnt have too. Do I truely support coplete and total anarchy, no, humans dont do well with out a few people in support. Also to support this we would have to destroy all idea of property and agriculture and go back to foraging for food as crops need protection so your neighbor doesnt just walk in and take them after you have grown them. Our current life style dictates we must live in a soceity and so we must work to control this soceity not let the society control us

 

[xvart]

Back when I was in highschool (or slightly later?), this lady & her cronies tried to ban D&D & Magic: The Gathering from the school district because they're "satanic."

D&D and M:TG made me the man I am today!

It would be nice if everyone was required to use florescent lights because then it would be easier to grow CPs in any room in the house!

xvart.

 

[Finch]

First my comment about total anarchy was to present an extreme. I dont think human beings will ever reach a point where they respect each other, so we either need to deal with a complete lack of control and total anarchy. Truely every human for themselves. The other option is soceity. As long as you have society certain liberties will be lost due to regulation. Its the price of living in a group. Either social pressure or gov't laws will force you to do something. The whole idea behind punishing a whole group such as a class or unit for the misbehavior of a few is to create a mini soceity in effect that will regulate itself so the authority doesnt have too. Do I truely support coplete and total anarchy, no, humans dont do well with out a few people in support. Also to support this we would have to destroy all idea of property and agriculture and go back to foraging for food as crops need protection so your neighbor doesnt just walk in and take them after you have grown them. Our current life style dictates we must live in a soceity and so we must work to control this soceity not let the society control us

Some people will always seek power and control, and it inevitable some will gain support, so an anarchical society is temporary at best, at is not a climax social state but a pioneer one. The pioneers are unable to compete with organized society when someone else decides they want something that your people have. Without organization, there is no defense against land-hungry neighbors. Thus a stable anarchical society is impossible, and cannot be the solution

Social organization is in us. We as humans inevitably group ourselves and the people around us as “us or them” If your US your favored over THEM. This is called ingrop-outgroup bias (google it), and is human nature. Given this, Anarchy in its purest form simply cannot exist. Psudo-anarchies can exist but they are inherently weak against anything that is more organized than a highschool football team

 

[neon-eon]

It would be nice if everyone was required to use florescent lights because then it would be easier to grow CPs in any room in the house!

Hey xvart, now that I think of it you do have a good point there. If only florescent lights were allowed then imagine how inexepensive terreriums would be. Also, isn't florescent light supposed to be like healthy for you or something.

 

[JB_OrchidGuy]

I didn't know we had that many MTG players here. I just sold my collection last year for 1600 bucks. I had the three power blues and almost a complete set of arabian nights. I was missing 5 or 6 cards for it. I had other power cards like Baserk and Underworld dreams. All original.

And for the banning thing. Yall can have the arguement. I am done. I will jsut say "I told you so" in the future.

Lets face it, we are going to deplete all out energy and the world will go into crisis and we'll all die. Who cares! Lets live life now, screw it!

Also lets face it this is NEVER going to happen. We will find a way to get energy one way or the other. Nuke power is already an option. They will have others by the time we really get low on other fuels. The fact that we can addapt is going to ensure we survive through just about anything.