maybe I'm just getting old, but I can't believe how serious this conversation is! lol cripey! hehe well I thought that was a classic story - it just about restored my faith in America! It reminds me of the first line of Bill Bryson's book: 'The Lost Continent: Travels in Small-Town America' "I was born in Des Moines Iowa. Somebody had to be."
>-----Original Message----- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Sent: March 28, 2003 10:46 AM >To: CF-Community >Subject: RE: Constitution, we don't need no stinking Constitution > > >Seat belts are a god idea, but I think that legislating their >use is insane. >Drug laws are ridiculous. They are a throw back to the >teetotalers of the >prohibition period. > >You say lets look at the cost to society as a whole. Ok lets >look at the >billions of dollars a year that are spent "combating" drugs in >the US. for >nothing. They are still used every day. You want to be able >to give a big >huge tax cut to the people of the US? Do away with most drug >laws. Come out >with laws closer to alcohol, can't drive on it, can't be >acting the fool in >public. Impose huge tariffs on it like cigarettes. Disband >the DEA. Wow, >imagine what that would do to the economy? Suddenly you have >this whole >underground section of the economy operating above ground, being taxed, >creating jobs, the whole nine yards. > >Tim > >-----Original Message----- >From: John Stanley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Sent: Friday, March 28, 2003 10:41 AM >To: CF-Community >Subject: RE: Constitution, we don't need no stinking Constitution > > >>>That goes along with my personal philosophy about laws - as >long as it >>>doesn't affect or hurt anybody else, then whatever you want >to do should >>>be ok. I've noticed that most of the controversial laws >these days are >>>aimed at "protecting you from yourself" as in drug laws, >seat belts, and >>>other privacy issues. > >Within reason. I think seatbelt laws are a good example for us >to follow. As >for privacy issues such as the right for a person to end their own life >because of a terrible disease, I dont think there should be >any legislation >against it. If I have terminal cancer, and I wanna stop the >pain. Some ass >clown in Lansing or Washington shouldn't be able to stop me >because they >dont think "it's the right thing to do" or it's not "morally >justified". > >As for drugs, jeez I have no clue. I mean if people wanna >string themselves >out on Heroin, crack, coke, speed, meth, ice, pot, paint fumes >that's fine >with me. But then you have to look at the costs to the society >as a whole >because these dorks are then running around selling their >asses or stealing >stuff, then it affects us all. So I have no clue what the >right answer is, >maybe there isn't one. > >-----Original Message----- >From: Matthew Small [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Sent: Friday, March 28, 2003 10:31 AM >To: CF-Community >Subject: RE: Constitution, we don't need no stinking Constitution > > >So you're basically saying that as long as the lie doesn't affect >anybody else, then it should be ok to do it? That makes sense to me. > >That goes along with my personal philosophy about laws - as long as it >doesn't affect or hurt anybody else, then whatever you want to >do should >be ok. I've noticed that most of the controversial laws these days are >aimed at "protecting you from yourself" as in drug laws, seat >belts, and >other privacy issues. > > > >Matthew Small >IT Supervisor >Showstopper National Dance Competitions >3660 Old Kings Hwy >Murrells Inlet, SC 29576 >843-357-1847 >http://www.showstopperonline.com > >-----Original Message----- >From: John Stanley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Sent: Friday, March 28, 2003 10:23 AM >To: CF-Community >Subject: RE: Constitution, we don't need no stinking Constitution > >I think the only lying which should be a crime is the lying under oath, >or >perjury. Other than that, if you can make a libel case stick than I say >go >for it, otherwise if I wanna walk around saying I caught a 45 pound >steelhead using nothing but a tootsie roll and my incredible >charm, then >I >should be able to. Do you agree? > >-----Original Message----- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Sent: Friday, March 28, 2003 10:15 AM >To: CF-Community >Subject: RE: Constitution, we don't need no stinking Constitution > > >Well the fire issue is more related to the fear and chaos that such a >pronouncement could cause. I mean If I say the sky is green and it's >really >blue should I be arrested? No, but lying about things is already >against >the law in some ways. Ummmm false crime reporting, libel, there are >some >things. > >Tim > >-----Original Message----- >From: Matthew Small [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Sent: Friday, March 28, 2003 10:01 AM >To: CF-Community >Subject: RE: Constitution, we don't need no stinking Constitution > > >Is lying protected by the Constitution? Of course, you have the right >to express your opinion, but you can't yell "Fire" in a >crowded theater, >which of course would be lying. > >I'm not saying I support this ordance, just wondering about the actual >legal ramifications. > >Matthew Small >IT Supervisor >Showstopper National Dance Competitions >3660 Old Kings Hwy >Murrells Inlet, SC 29576 >843-357-1847 >http://www.showstopperonline.com > >-----Original Message----- >From: Nick McClure [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Sent: Friday, March 28, 2003 9:55 AM >To: CF-Community >Subject: Constitution, we don't need no stinking Constitution > >http://www.startribune.com/stories/1451/3788172.html > > > > > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=5 This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place for dependable ColdFusion Hosting. Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
